Computer-implemented method and system for automated claim charts with context associations

ABSTRACT

A computer-enabled system, method, and medium is provided to correlate intellectual property analysis, for example, patent claim charts, with respect to the analyzed intellectual property and a target product or other intellectual property. Analysis are stored in a manner that enables searching across multiple analysis, and creating reports over multiple analysis. Units of the analysis are associated with a context, inherited, e.g., from the intellectual property document&#39;s assignment to a relative role within the organizational hierarchy; and associated with a context derived from the analysis itself. The analysis and respective documents and/or targets of the analysis can be searched/retrieved/analyzed from the hierarchical analysis, the context analysis, and/or the content of the analysis. This obviates the need to store each analysis as a separate document. The representation of the analysis may be static or dynamic. The target or annotations may be visually represented by an item such as a thumbnail or hyperlink, and the system automatically associates the item with the appropriate application program.

RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. application Ser. No.10/725,531, filed Dec. 3, 2003 now U.S. Pat. No. 7,885,987, which is acontinuation-in-part of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/692,793, filed Oct.27, 2003, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. application Ser. No.10/229,273 filed Aug. 28, 2002, which claims priority from U.S.Provisional Application Ser. No. 60/315,021, filed Aug. 28, 2001, all ofwhich are expressly incorporated herein by reference.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Field of the Invention

The present invention is directed to computer-related and/or assistedsystems, methods and computer readable mediums for creating andoptionally automating intellectual property analyses, e.g., claimcharts; and sorting, organizing, reporting and/or providing analysisdocuments in connection with the analyses.

Description of the Related Art

Many corporations are focusing on their intellectual property assets asbeing quite valuable. Hence these companies strive to develop largeintellectual property portfolios, and indeed spend time and money onthese assets. There is a concomitant pressure to leverage and/or bettermanage these portfolios of intellectual property assets. As a result, agreat deal of emphasis has been placed on better ways to analyze thevalue of a portfolio, better processes for managing the portfolio andbetter strategies for creating opportunities to extract value from theportfolio.

One of the many ways corporations analyze their intellectual propertyassets is by analyzing the validity of the intellectual property asset,or by comparing the intellectual property to their own products orproducts of another company. Preparation of the comparison or analysis,such as in a claim chart, is painstaking, though portions may be rote.Each individual analysis or comparison is discrete.

Perhaps because the individual analyses are discrete and painstaking,various attempts have been made to analyze the relevance of intellectualproperty documents as a group, or to automate portions of the, analysisprocess. Some aspects of conventional systems are illustrated by way ofexample in FIG. 33, also described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,665,656, Carter(expressly incorporated herein by reference). Carter provides an exampleillustration, in a table, of a rank-ordered output of correlatinginformation related to an asset (e.g., infringement or invalidityreferences related to a patent) after performing a search. The displayedinformation 3301 includes a list of retrieved documents, such aspotentially invalidating or infringing references 3305, a relevanceranking 3302, a user ranking 3304 and other optional information fields3303. In this particular illustrative example, the target document inputfrom the user is labeled Patent A. An ontology builder can parse theterminology within a target patent (or other document), determinerelationships between terms in the document, and determine which termsin the document are more dominant than others. There is a highcorrelation of the target document to itself, thus, the first entry inthe displayed information table 3305 is the target document Patent A.The relevance ranking for Patent A is 1.000, the highest correlationrank. The relevance ranking is a correlation indicator between acomparison of the ontology for the target document and an ontologycreated for the listed document. In addition to correlation, the usermay rank the documents based or other criteria, such as company owner,date, perceived importance, or other factors. In the particular example,various technical papers, patents, data books, and other informationsources such as news articles, SEC filings, data books of competitorsweb sites, IEEE industry standard documents, and the like are listed.

Another aspect of conventional systems is illustrated in FIG. 34, alsodescribed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,038,561, Snyder et al. (expresslyincorporated herein by reference), concerning analyzing and displayinginformation contained in multiple documents employing both term-basedanalysis and conceptual-representation analysis, for, e.g., analyzingpatent texts, such as patent claims, abstracts and other portions of apatent document. Snyder illustrates the steps to produce an S-curve foranalyzing documents from Company A verses documents from Company B. Theprocess depicted in the flow chart 3401 begins with the generation ofall scores (either term or concept) from a claim level data set A versusdata set B analysis 3450. For example, the patents from Company Acompared with the patents from Company B on a claim by claim basis.These scores are in the range of 0.0 to 1.0. Next, in step 3452, allclaims are sequentially numbered such that the first claim from CompanyA is 1 and the last claim from Company B is n and all claims from Aprecede all claims from B. In step 3454, for each claim index I fromCompany A the closest claim from Company B is found, and the pair (I,S-1.0) where S is the similarity score of A compared with B is recorded.Next, in step 3456, for each claim index I from Company B the closestclaim from company A is found, and the pair (I, 1.0-S) where S is thesimilarity score of A compared to B is recorded. Finally, in step 3458,all pairs are sorted in increasing order of second coordinate anddisplayed on a plot where the x-axis represents the claim index and they-axis represents the claim score. The result is a plot in the form ofan S-curve where the bottom part of the S represents claims unique tocompany A; the middle part represents claims with possible overlapsbetween the two companies, and the top part represents claims unique toCompany B.

FIG. 35 illustrates other aspects of conventional systems, alsodescribed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,774,833, Newman (expressly incorporatedherein by reference). Newman is an example of syntactic and semanticanalysis of patent text and drawings. Newman discloses a method forprocessing patent text 3501 in a computer, including identifyingboundaries of parts of patent text 3502, selecting a section of thepatent text 3503, loading at least one of the parts of the patent textinto a working memory 3204, analyzing at least one of the parts of thepatent text 3505, and reporting results 3506 to a user. Patent textsections generally include the title, the field of the invention,background of the invention, summary of the invention, brief descriptionof the drawings, detailed description of the drawings (or preferredembodiments), claims, and the abstract of the invention. Identificationof claim elements can be accomplished with a combined syntactic andsemantic analysis of the claim wording. Alphanumeric drawing data canalso be compared to patent text. Newman can loop through more sections3508, selecting the next section 3509 until done 3507. Newman'sinvention can be coupled to work with a word processor program. Newmancan recognize and report, e.g., claim dependency specificcharacteristics of patent text.

While these management and analysis techniques have resulted in moreefficient use of attorney resources, and more targeted intellectualproperty filings and funding, relatively little has been done to takeadvantage of current computational technologies, the integration of dataresources (largely through the Internet), and better knowledge-basedsoftware systems to handle aspects of intellectual property. As aresult, no process or product exists for handling the full range ofintellectual property functions in an automated manner.

Accordingly, there exists a need in the market for a comprehensivesystem that incorporates tools that will give the intellectual propertyprofessional the ability to work in all aspects of their practice areausing automated, analysis tools to assist them in their practice.

Moreover, many corporations have a wide range of intellectual propertyassets, but no technique to make associations between assets. Forexample, a particular license may implicate several patents.Conventional systems do not support the association of the intellectualproperty assets, and they certainly do not support a memorializedexplanation of the association. Even if a user is able to determine afew related intellectual property assets, the problem of determiningassociated intellectual property assets grows geometrically more complexwith the number of intellectual property assets.

Accordingly, I have determined that the complexities affecting theanalysis, use, accessing, researching, presenting, etc., of intellectualproperty and related information make it extremely difficult for acustomer to integrate information in various scenarios. I havedetermined that a customer might want to create or provide an analysisof intellectual property (e.g., a patent claim chart, a trademarkcomparison chart, a copyright comparison chart, etc.) for multipleproducts, patents, and/or other intellectual property; and a customerthat has, e.g., multiple analyses such as claim charts might be able toleverage an analysis of intellectual property coverage. A customer mightdesire to automate some or all of the process of creating a claim chart(or other infringement or comparison analysis), in particular as itrelates to other intellectual property and/or other analyses. Inaddition, a customer might want to determine, e.g. which patents (orother intellectual property documents, including trademarks, copyrights,etc.) and/or analyses are implicated by and/or related to, for example,a particular component, a particular product, a particular technology, alicense for a particular product, a company, a corporate division, atype of service, or other, perhaps company-specific, criteria. I havefurther determined that a customer might want to ascertain theintellectual property documents and analyses that are related onmultiple levels, optionally including details relating to therelationships. There exists a profound need for such a method and/orsystem.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

I therefore contemplate providing methods and/or computer systems thatwill provide an automated or semi-manual process for searching, editing,reporting, analyzing, and/or viewing intellectual property analyses;and/or for assisting the creation of intellectual property analysis,e.g., claim charts and comparison charts, including, e.g., automaticevaluation, automatic population of claim language withcollapsing/expanding rows and accommodation of chemical formulas,equations and other non-standard format components. One or more aspectsof the present invention provides for context to be assigned toanalyses, and to relationships between intellectual property assigned tothe analyses. I further propose to provide, in one or more embodimentsof the present intention, optional claim chart presentations, e.g., astatic chart with items embedded therein, a dynamic chart, and optionalfeatures, e.g., dependencies. I further propose that one or more aspectsof the invention provide for analysis of various types of intellectualproperty, e.g., patents, trademarks, and/or copyrights. Further, one ormore aspects of the invention may be adapted to traditional analysis,e.g., infringement, product coverage, validity, and/or design around.One or more aspects of the present invention provide that the analysesof intellectual property documents themselves may be sorted, organized,reported, and or analyzed, e.g., through contexts of the analyses and/orrelationships of intellectual property documents assigned to theanalyses. Related tools are optionally included.

Consequently, the present invention alleviates the deficiencies ofconventional techniques described above. Aspects of the presentinvention provide for the significant improvement of the management ofintellectual property, by for example, enabling personnel to documentthe associations between various intellectual properties, to analyzevarious intellectual properties in context of a company, its partners,and/or competitors, to automate the analysis, and/or to relate thevarious analyses, optionally to products and/or services, and/or provideannotations capturing their conclusions from analyzing thoseassociations.

By way of example, a clause within a sublicense agreement may referencea paragraph within an original license agreement, a spreadsheetcontaining royalty payment schedules, a copyright registration, and/or aphotograph of the cover of a book. Furthermore, a clause within thesublicense may have textual and/or multimedia annotations, explanations,etc. containing comments by attorneys and/or corporate managementemphasizing specific aspects of importance about the related item.Another example is a product specification referencing an individualclaim of a patent, specific paragraphs of a license agreement, aregistered trademark, a product web page on the Internet, and/or a linkto a product drawing file. The reference to the patent claim maycontain, e.g., a conformance analysis of why the product does notviolate a competitor's patent or why a particular patent may be invalidover a particular prior art reference or why a competitor's productinfringes a particular patent, or a comment identifying how a keycompetitive feature of the product is protected by the patent.

One or more embodiments of the present invention may be capable ofvarious configurations to adapt to user needs. For example, in one ormore embodiments it may be used in conjunction with a customer site witha single server containing all data, for use by a small number ofsimultaneously connected users. Alternatively, one or more embodimentsmay be set up for use in conjunction with a multi-server distributedenvironment, for use, e.g., by a large number of simultaneouslyconnected users at a large corporate use site. In another embodiment,the invention supports users connected to an Internet backbone as partof a licensed service.

One or more embodiments of the present invention may provide for readilynavigating and/or annotating intellectual property documents.

One or more embodiments of the present invention optionally allow a userto download a set of related documents, for example to work offlinewhile disconnected from the server, and to reconnect and synchronizechanges with a server. In accordance with the present invention, thereare provided methods, systems and at least one computer-readable mediumfor providing a searchable set of contexts of intellectual propertydocuments assigned within a hierarchy, and intellectual propertyanalyses of the documents, for searching, editing, reporting, analyzingand/or viewing, implemented by one or more computers. Where theinvention comprises steps, the steps can be sequential, non-sequential,and/or sequence-independent.

One or more embodiments of the present invention includes determiningone or more intellectual property documents, which has one or morecontextual tags associated therewith. The contextual tag(s) includesinformation derived from an assignment of the document(s) within thehierarchy. Also included is determining one the types of analyses to beapplied to the intellectual property document(s), wherein one or moretype of analysis corresponds to a type of intellectual property, and thetype(s) of analysis includes one or more units of analysis determined bythe type of analysis. Also included is processing the intellectualproperty document(s) according to the type of analysis, includingassociating the unit(s) of analysis with (i) an analysis contextdetermined by the type of analysis and the intellectual propertydocument(s), (ii) a reference to a portion (or more) of the content ofthe intellectual property document(s), and (iii) a contextual tag.Further included is interacting with a user to determine the content ofthe unit(s) of analysis corresponding to the intellectual propertydocument(s) and the type of analysis applied to the intellectualproperty document(s). Also provided for is storing the analysis context,the content of the analysis, and the contextual tag corresponding to theunit(s) of analysis, in association, for later search and retrieval.

One or more embodiments of the present invention further provide forutilizing the analysis context and/or the contextual tag as searchcriteria for searching and/or retrieving (i) the intellectual propertydocument(s), (ii) the contextual tag(s), (iii) the analysis context(s),and/or (iv) the content(s) of the analysis.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, theanalysis context corresponding to a patent type of intellectual propertyrefers to a patent, a patent claim, a patent claim element, and/or atarget to which at least a portion of the patent is compared.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, theanalysis context includes one or more targets of the analysis and, ifthe at least one target is not stored locally, stores a local copy ofthe target(s).

One or more embodiments of the present invention further includeproviding a representation of the analysis applied to the intellectualproperty document(s), including associating a representation of theanalysis context with a representation of the content of the analysis.

One or more embodiments of the present invention provide for one or moreintellectual property analysis with respect to a target intellectualproperty or product, implemented by one or more computers. There isprovided one or more intellectual property analysis, associated with afirst intellectual property, wherein the analysis includes elements.Also included is providing one or more target including a secondintellectual property and/or a representation of a product. Alsoprovided is associating one or more of the elements with at least aportion of the target(s), and determining at least one referencecorresponding thereto. Further provided is storing the reference(s) inassociation with the target(s), and the first intellectual property, forlater retrieval of the reference(s), the target(s), and/or the firstintellectual property.

One or more embodiments of the present invention includes providing arepresentation of the analysis, wherein the representation is staticand/or dynamic.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, theanalysis is a patent non-infringement analysis, a patent invalidityanalysis, a patent freedom to operate analysis, a patent productcoverage analysis, a patent claim construction analysis, a patentinfringement analysis, a trademark infringement analysis, or a copyrightinfringement analysis.

One or more embodiments of the present invention include providing arepresentation of the analysis, wherein the target is visuallyrepresented by one or more items embedded in the representation, furtherincluding determining a program to display the embedded item(s).

One or more embodiments of the present invention include searching forone or more documents based on criteria including the portion (or more)of the target(s), the reference(s), and/or the element(s).

One or more embodiments of the present invention include providing arepresentation of the analysis, and accessing the at least one documentfrom the representation(s), the target(s), the first intellectualproperty, and the reference(s) stored in association therewith.

One or more embodiments of the present invention further includedisplaying information characterizing the document(s).

Optionally, the intellectual property is representative of an inventiondisclosure, a patent application, draft patent claims, a patentdocument, a utility model, a trademark document, a copyright document, aproduct description document, a license document, a non-disclosureagreement (NDA), a memorandum of understanding (MOU), a sui generisprotection document, a design registration document, a trade secretdocument, and/or an opinion document.

Optionally, the reference(s) corresponds to the serial number of thedocument(s).

One or more embodiments of the present invention further includeautomatically populating the element(s) from the first intellectualproperty.

One or more embodiments of the present invention further include,responsive to user input, collapsing and/or expanding the element(s)with respect to an adjacent element.

One or more embodiments of the present invention further include, forthe element(s), prompting the user to indicate a correspondence betweenthe element(s) and the portion (or more) of the target.

One or more embodiments of the present invention provide for sorting,organizing, searching, reporting and/or analyzing more than oneintellectual property analyses, implemented on at least one computer.Accordingly, one or more embodiments of the present invention providefor selecting intellectual property analyses, wherein informationcharacterizing the analysis is stored in the computer system(s);selecting a target, an intellectual property, and/or the informationcharacterizing the analysis; and processing the informationcharacterizing the analysis to determine one or more of the intellectualproperty analyses corresponding to the target, the intellectualproperty, and/or the information characterizing the analysis.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, theintellectual property analysis relates to a first intellectual propertyand the analysis includes elements; the target includes a secondintellectual property and/or a representation of a product. According toone or more embodiments of the present invention, the analysis and/orone or more of the elements is associated with a portion (or more) ofthe target(s). Further, one or more reference is stored in associationwith the target(s), and the first intellectual property, for laterretrieval of the reference(s), the target(s), and/or the firstintellectual property.

There has thus been outlined, rather broadly, the more importantfeatures of the invention in order that the detailed description thereofthat follows may be better understood, and in order that the presentcontribution to the art may be better appreciated. There are, of course,additional features of the invention that will be described hereinafterand which will form the subject matter of the claims appended hereto.

In this respect, before explaining at least one embodiment of theinvention in detail, it is to be understood that the invention is notlimited in its application to the details of construction and to thearrangements of the components set forth in the following description orillustrated in the drawings. The invention is capable of otherembodiments and of being practiced and carried out in various ways.Also, it is to be understood that the phraseology and terminologyemployed herein are for the purpose of description and should not beregarded as limiting.

As such, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the conception,upon which this disclosure is based, may readily be utilized as a basisfor the designing of other structures, methods and systems for carryingout the several purposes of the present invention. It is important,therefore, that the claims be regarded as including such equivalentconstructions insofar as they do not depart from the spirit and scope ofthe present invention.

Further, the purpose of the forgoing abstract is to enable the U.S.Patent and Trademark Office and the public generally, and especially thescientists, engineers and practitioners in the art who are not familiarwith patent or legal terms or phraseology, to determine quickly from acursory inspection the nature and essence of the technical disclosure ofthe application. The abstract is neither intended to define theinvention of the application, which is measured by the claims, nor is itintended to be limiting as to the scope of the invention in any way.These together with other objects of the invention, along with thevarious features of novelty that characterize the invention, are pointedout with particularity in the claims annexed to and forming a part ofthis disclosure. For a better understanding of the invention, itsoperating advantages and specific features attained by its uses,reference should be had to the accompanying drawings and descriptivematter in which there is illustrated preferred embodiments of theinvention.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S)

The above-mentioned and other features and advantages of the presentinvention will be better understood from the following detaileddescription of the invention with reference to the accompanyingdrawings, in which:

FIG. 1 is a functional block diagram illustrating a system architectureproviding for annotating intellectual property documents and data,according to one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram of one example of a system for use inconnection with analyzing and managing intellectual property documents,according to one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 3 is a combined functional block diagram with data flow,illustrating an exemplary data manager according to one or moreembodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 4 is a user interface, illustrating editing of an intellectualproperty document, according to one or more embodiments of the presentinvention.

FIG. 5 is a user interface illustrating an example of annotation for anintellectual property document, according to one or more embodiments ofthe present invention.

FIG. 6 is a user interface illustrating an example of an additionalwindow for linking a selected document to another intellectual propertydocument, according to one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 7 is a user interface illustrating an example of a report view of amarked-up document, according to one or more embodiments of the presentinvention.

FIG. 8 is a user interface illustrating an example of a map view of amarked up document, according to one or more embodiments of the presentinvention.

FIG. 9 is a functional block diagram with data flow, illustrating anexemplary data server according to one or more embodiments of thepresent invention.

FIG. 10 is a functional block diagram with data flow, illustrating anexemplary data analyzer according to one or more embodiments of thepresent invention.

FIG. 11 is a block diagram, illustrating data flow for splitting anannotated document into annotated data and document data, according toone or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 12 is a block diagram illustrating data flow for merging theannotation data and document data of FIG. 11 into the annotateddocument, according to one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 13 is a block diagram illustrating an example association ofexternal data with a document that has been annotated, in accordancewith one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIGS. 14A-B are a flow chart illustrating merging of document data withannotation data to produce a marked-up representation of the document,according to one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 15 is a flow chart illustrating splitting a marked-uprepresentation of a document into annotation data and document data,according to one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 16 is a linked diagram illustrating an example of annotatedintellectual property documents and data, according to one or moreembodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 17 is a linked diagram illustrating another example of annotatedintellectual property documents and data, according to one or moreembodiments of the present invention.

FIGS. 18A-B are a flow chart of an example of annotating a documentand/or linking the document to another document (or portion thereof),according to one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 19 is a flow chart illustrating an example of traversingintellectual property documents via links in an annotation thereto,according to one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 20 is a block diagram illustrating a computer architecture, for usein connection with one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 21 is an illustration of a computer appropriate for use inconnection with one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 22 is a block diagram illustrating the internal hardware of thecomputer of FIG. 21.

FIG. 23 is an illustration of an alternative computer appropriate foruse in connection with one or more embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 24 is an example of a claim chart, in a static style, with exampleitems embedded therein.

FIG. 25 is an example of a claim chart corresponding to FIG. 24, in adynamic style, wherein the cells of the chart are windows.

FIG. 26 is an example of a claim chart corresponding to FIG. 24,including an example of a dependencies feature.

FIG. 27 is an example of an alternative, multiple-window view of a claimchart.

FIG. 28 is an example of a user interface including an intellectualproperty document tree, an intellectual property organizer tree, and anoptional explorer, illustrating an example of initiating an analysis.

FIG. 29 is an example of a user interface including an intellectualproperty document tree, an intellectual property organizer tree, and theoptional explorer, showing selection of an intellectual propertydocument being assigned to a location in the document tree.

FIG. 30 is an example of a user interface including an intellectualproperty document tree, and an optional view of the selectedintellectual property document.

FIG. 31 is an example of a user interface including an intellectualproperty document tree and an intellectual property analysis.

FIG. 32 is an example block diagram of the embodiment according to FIG.1, with some elements omitted for clarity of illustration, illustratingone or more portions of databases relevant to analysis.

FIG. 33 is an example of a related art tabular display of a rank-orderedoutput of information correlation to an asset, e.g., infringement orinvalidity references for a patent.

FIG. 34 is an example flow chart for a related art for analyzing andreporting information in multiple documents utilizing term-basedanalysis and conceptual-representation analysis for, e.g., analyzingpatent documents.

FIG. 35 is an example flow chart for a related art for analyzing patenttext, including identifying boundaries of parts of a patent text.

FIG. 36 is an alternative example of a user interface illustratingselecting an intellectual property document from an intellectualproperty document tree and determining an intellectual propertyanalysis.

FIG. 37 is an alternative example of a user interface illustrating anintellectual property analysis.

FIG. 38 is an example of a user interface illustrating an examplesummary report of intellectual property analyses.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The following detailed description includes many specific details. Theinclusion of such details is for the purpose of illustration only andshould not be understood to limit the invention. Throughout thisdiscussion, similar elements are referred to by similar numbers in thevarious figures, for ease of reference. In addition, features in oneembodiment may be combined with features in other embodiments of theinvention.

Intellectual property information regarding intellectual propertydocuments by a customer, intellectual property service provider,government entity or other source has been collected. Likely suchinformation is extracted and deposited into one or more databases.Ultimately at least a portion of such intellectual property informationis presented to an end user on behalf of a customer, such as via anintellectual property application, which may be executing locally, orvia a web site over the World Wide Web, i.e., the Internet. For ease ofdescription, such a collection of information will be referred to hereinas “database”, although it should be recognized that the informationmight be collected in other formats as well, and that an intellectualproperty application might not be restricted to data stored in adatabase.

The association between selected intellectual property information isrealized and optionally annotated. The annotation enables users toannotate images and text in intellectual property, such as, e.g., patentdrawings. Those annotations are saved and optionally categorized. Forexample, annotated drawings or images are saved in the context ofprojects in order that notes and other thoughts of the user arememorialized and tied to a project.

FIG. 1 is a functional block diagram illustrating a system architectureproviding for annotating intellectual property documents and data,according to one or more embodiments of the present invention. In theillustrated example, the system is realized as an intellectual propertyportal 111 on a general purpose computer, communicating with a network,e.g., the Internet 105. A user 107 accesses the portal 111 via theInternet 105. A document workspace 109 is provided on a computer for theuser 107. Applications for locating, viewing and annotating intellectualproperty documents and data are provided on the portal 111. In thepresent example, the applications include an editing view 119, anannotation view 117, a map view 115, a report view 113, a searchapplication 101, and a browse application 103. Any application programuseful for searching or browsing intellectual property documents may beutilized to implement the search application 101 or the browseapplication 103. Intellectual property documents and data may be storedin any appropriate manner. In the present example, the intellectualproperty documents and data are stored in a patents database 131, atrademarks database 125, a copyrights database 127, a licenses database129, and an opinions database 123. In this example, the opinionsdatabase 123 is separate from the portal 111. The system also includesstorage of the annotations in an annotations database 121. The useraccesses one or more of the intellectual property documents togetherwith any annotations, e.g., by searching or browsing for the selecteddocument. The user may manipulate, annotate, and/or link one or moreselected documents via one or more of the applications. The annotatedand/or linked document(s) are stored into the appropriate databases bythe user. Access to annotations and/or annotated documents optionally islimited, e.g., by corporate affiliation of the user and annotation, byuser, by express permission to one or more users, etc.

A system design for use in connection with one or more embodiments ofthe present invention, as illustrated in FIG. 2, may advantageouslycomprise a number of interconnected components. Each component may focuson a specific task, and advantageously provides and/or utilizes anApplication Programming Interface (API) to communicate with othercomponents within the system, according to the illustrated realizationof one example system. Components may include, for example, one or moredata servers 205-211, a data manager 201, one or more analyzer views113, 115, 117, 119, a management console 221, and/or a watch agent 223.Components and/or functions thereof may be omitted, replaced, subdividedand/or combined and still remain within the scope of the invention. Thedata servers 205-211 provide access to the data representing theintellectual property documents; the data analyzer 203 provides userinterfaces to obtain, analyze and/or traverse intellectual propertydocuments; and the data manager 201 breaks down documents into storableunits and builds up documents for the user interfaces.

In accordance with one or more embodiments of the present invention,scalability may be provided by the logical and/or physical separation ofdata server 211 functionality from the data manager 201. For example,the data manager may reside with one (or more) data server on e.g., asingle machine storing all patent, licensing, and annotation data. Asone of many alternatives, the data manager may connect to multiple dataservers, each running on a separate machine, and each storing only aportion of the data.

According to one or more optional realizations of the present invention,offline storage and/or operation may be provided for example, by adocument manager, discussed below, which stores some or all working datalocally on the user's machine, and/or by API functionality to retrieveand store documents from the data manager 201.

FIG. 2 illustrates one or more embodiments of a general overallarchitecture for use in connection with the present invention. Thisfigure illustrates internal architecture, useful for illustrating theconcepts in relation to the invention. Portions of the architecture maybe omitted and/or replaced and/or combined when used in connection withcertain embodiments of the present invention. This example of one ormore embodiments of the present invention illustrates an optional 3-tierarchitecture, including the data server tier, the data manager tier, andthe data analyzer tier. More or fewer tiers may be utilized, in otherembodiments of the present invention. The data server (or multiple dataservers) 205-211, according to one or more embodiments of the presentinvention, may provide for storage, versioning, indexing and/orsearching of (possibly a subset of) document data (e.g., XML) annotationdata, and/or image data.

Optionally, there may be provided one or more data servers 205 a-c, 207,209, 211 amongst which the data server functions may be divided. In thepresent example, several data servers are provided. Optionally, amultiple data server format may house one or more sets of relatedinformation. In this illustration, one data server might contain theentire United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) database;and/or one data server might contain multiple databases. According toone example alternative, the related information (in this case, theUSPTO database) may be spread over multiple data servers 105 a-c.According to a convenient realization, for example, one data server maycontain only the patents ending in “1”, another server might containpatents ending in “2”, a third might contain patents ending in “3”, andso on; according to this example, there are 10 servers, across which isdistributed, preferably in a logical manner, preferably the entire USPTOdatabase. By distributing the data servers and functions, one or moreembodiments of the present invention may provide for a scalable solutionfor storing generalized data used by the system.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, the datamay be stored in its original format. Alternatively, it may bereformatted at some point or points prior to storage. The format for thedata that the USPTO currently provides data for patents is XML, amark-up language which is fairly similar to HTML. XML is a generalizedsyntax for creating a document structure and tags, unlike HTML, whichhas predefined tags. XML essentially leaves the meaning of those tags tothe developer of the dialect. In this case the USPTO has defined theindividual tags that exist within this language and the meaning tag ofeach. The system may use the syntax as provided by one or morepatent/trademark offices, government, and/or commercial data providers,or optionally, the syntax may be converted, e.g., into one or morestandard formats. In the illustrated example, the USPTO patent database(both text (XML) and image data) is distributed across three dataservers 205 a, b and c.

Similarly, one or more embodiments of the present invention mayaccommodate other data and/or other formats, e.g., an XML schema forlicense agreements. Such a schema for a license agreement mayaccommodate, e.g., typical, usual, optional and/or advanced elementsthat are available within the license agreement, e.g., a preamble,definition section, individual definitions, paragraphs, clauses,sections, articles, etc. In the illustrated example, license documentsare stored on the data server 209.

As illustrated in the example of FIG. 2, each data server in amulti-data server embodiment within the system may contain all, a subsetand/or a portion of the information that is available to the user. Dataserver 5 209 stores, in the present example, license data, copyrightdata, and trademark data. These databases are likely to be much smallerthan the USPTO patent database. Hence, a single server may store morethan one type of data. Optionally, non-USPTO data is included.

According to the illustrated example, data server 4 207 storesannotation data (discussed below), e.g., having annotationscorresponding to some of the patents and/or licenses. The annotationdata may include, e.g. electronic mark-ups that attorneys or other userswould make, e.g., in connection with a document. Further in thisexample, data servers 1 through 3 store the patent text and image dataof the USPTO patent database (or a portion thereof).

The optional data manager 201 may pull together the data that may bedistributed across one or more servers. The data manager advantageouslyprovides a single cohesive and comprehensive management of a givendatabase. The data manager, according to one or more embodiments of thepresent invention, provides for the seamless distribution, coordination,and searching, of documents (e.g., XML), or merging of annotation data(e.g., XML), and image data across one or more data servers. Itoptionally may support caching of search requests and/or results, and/orreplication of data to and/or from remote servers.

Reference is made to FIG. 3, providing one or more example embodimentsof the data manager 201 architecture. The data manager may provide anobject API 319 having services to receive requests and/transmitinformation to/from the data analyzer 323, e.g., to insert, update,delete, and/or request document data, e.g. XML data. The object API mayhave and/or retrieve binary data, such as for images and/or sound, forexample. XML data requests may be further processed within the datamanager; and, if appropriate, passed to a data server 321; binaryrequests may be passed on through to the underlying data server 321.

Consider for example that documents are provided in XML format, and thatannotations for each document are provided as annotation data entitiestherein. When an XML data insertion or update occurs, the XML data isfirst parsed by an XML parser 308. This parser maybe driven by a mark-upschema 317, which identifies XML tags within the document for annotationdata entities, and the relationship of the XML tags to the document dataentities. The annotation data entities are extracted from the XMLdocument. They may be used to create an annotation XML data stream. Theremainder of the XML data, that is, the potentially revised documentwithout the annotations, may be used to create a document XML datastream.

Where multiple data servers are provided, an optional connection manager301 may be provided, to identify which data server(s) stores the data atissue if distributed, e.g., the document data, the annotation dataand/or the image data, such as by maintaining a mapping. Image data maybe stored on the same data server as the document data or may be storedelsewhere.

Continuing with the above example of XML documents, when an XML requestoccurs, the data manager 201 retrieves the document XML data and theannotation XML data from their respective one or more data servers. Itthen parses both these XML data streams with one or more XML parsers308. Using the mark-up schema 317, it embeds the annotations from theannotation XML data within the corresponding tagged elements of thedocument XML data, and with annotation merge logic 307, merges bothstreams into a single XML document.

When a search request occurs, search and result merge logic 303optionally looks up each keyword in the one or more thesauri of the dataserver(s), and any match is added to a search keyword list. The searchrequest may contain a list of searchable fields appropriate to thedocuments being searched (e.g. Abstract, Inventor, Claims, etc. forpatents), and/or the scope of the search (e.g. Patent, Copyright,Annotation, etc.). The search is then executed on the relevant DataServers, the results are collected, and they are returned to the caller.Search results optionally may be returned from the data server inpartial result groupings, such as of a specified fixed size; thispermits the data manager 201 to satisfy a search request quickly, whiledeferring much of the processing overhead for result fetching untilactually needed.

If a user is browsing back and forth through a number of items returnedfrom a search, it is likely that they will request the same documentrepeatedly within a short period of time. An optional cache manager 311maintains a mapping of client search requests to search results. If arequest is repeated while the result is cached, the result may bereturned from an Image and XML cache 313 through the cache manager 311,instead of generating a new data server search request.

When the optional change notification event is received from a dataserver, it is passed in to the change notification handler 309, thenthrough to the object API 319. It may be passed to an optionalreplication service, which maintains a list of registered downstreamdata managers. One or more data managers may be registered forreplication of information, as identified e.g., by data server and itemtype, and will be notified of such changes. A notified data server mayrequest the information. The replication service 315 maintains a queuing316 of notifications for those registered data managers that areunreachable or are flagged for queuing. The optional change notificationevent may provide the basis for a subscription service, in order toprovide customers with updated latest patent and trademark information.The optional change notification event and replication service may beused for enabling a system to distribute to multiple data servers, evenif distributed around the world, while maintaining synchronizationbetween them. The optional change notification event may be provided tothe cache manager 311, which may be used to enable it to flush an imageand XML cache 313 of outdated items.

Reference is made back to FIG. 2. According to one or more embodimentsof the present invention, an optional search engine locates storeddocuments by performing searches on phrases and/or individual words. Forexample, the search engine interface may provide a column for proceedingword and another for following word. As a further example, to accessintellectual property patent data, when doing a search, a search requestmay result in a hit to all three of the Data Servers 205 a, b, c inparallel. According to one or more embodiments of the present invention,the data manager 201 is responsible for coordinating among thedistributed Data Servers where multiple data servers have potentiallyrelevant data, and for being aware of the range of specific data on eachdata server. If a search request is received, the data manager 201 maybroadcast that request to all of the relevant data servers (three in theillustrated example), receive the search request results returned fromthose data servers, and then merge the results back together again andcreate a single common results set. The advantage of distributing asearch is that one may speed up the search, average-out the effect ofmultiple users, and/or numerous requests being received, and load-levelthe users working with an individual patent and its image data. The datamanager 201 thus provides an optional second logical level, where itpulls together the content of the data servers, and/or provides amongother things a view into a company's intellectual property database.

An optional third logical level is the data analyzer 203. The dataanalyzer 203 performs, inter alia, formatting of information into arepresentation that is user friendly, so that a user may read and/oredit. The data analyzer 203 may include prompting the user forannotations, for accepting annotation data, for displaying data, forcreating reports, for creating a document map which demonstrates therelationships of one set of information to another, etc.

Reference is made to FIGS. 4-8, illustrating several example windows401, 501, 601, 701, and 801, open within a user interface according toone or more embodiments of the present invention. One or more aspects ofthe present invention assist in working with relationships betweendocuments and/or portions thereof.

The user interfaces to the intellectual property documents areoptionally enabled by the data analyzer 203, illustrated in FIG. 2.Reference is made to FIGS. 1 and 4-7. In this example, the license inthe editing window 401 (FIG. 4) correlates to the editing view 119 (FIG.1). A report window 701 (FIG. 7) demonstrates the report view 113 (FIG.1), a map window 801 (FIG. 8) demonstrates the map view 115 (FIG. 1) anda mark-up window 501 (FIG. 5) represents the annotation view 117 (FIG.1).

Reference is now made to FIG. 4. The user in this example has retrievedan intellectual property document to edit and/or annotate, e.g., alicense, into an editing window 401. One or more aspects of the presentinvention provide that the user may logically subdivide that documentinto sections. Those sections may then be related to sections withinthat or another document. The relationship between one document andanother, and/or between one section in one document and a section inanother document (or the document itself) may be annotated. Theannotation allows a user, e.g., an attorney who is analyzing thisinformation, to indicate within a document, for example, an issue, theresult of an analysis, how this portion of this document relates to thatportion of that document, etc.

Referring again to FIG. 4, the intellectual property document 403 (inthis example, the license) is displayed in the editing window 401. Theediting window 403 presently displays that portion of the documentencompassing “Article 1,” “Section 1.1,” which in the example isentitled “Trade Secret License.” In one or more embodiments of thepresent invention, one or more active portions 405, e.g., “Trade SecretLicense”, may be outlined, and/or highlighted such as in red on thescreen, in order to indicate that this is an active portion 405 of thedocument being viewed. A further indication, e.g., a special highlightor color, e.g., optionally may be used to indicate that there is anannotation associated therewith, e.g. a possible conformance issue or afailed conflict.

By way of example of a possible use of one aspect of the invention, if auser is performing, e.g. evaluation of a license against a patent or aproduct against a patent, for each of the claims in the patent, the usermay be viewing parts of the license and the claims one at a time andindicating that a certain aspect of this product, license, or documentfails to conform to some aspect of this patent claim. The user mayselect one of several standard notations reflecting, for example, astandard, system provided relation, and/or a super-user-customizedattribute concerning the respective documents, e.g. that a product orlicense, etc. is in violation of this patent claim, or may be inviolation of this patent claim, or is not in violation of this patentclaim. The user may wish to add other text, annotations, references toother documents or URL's or files, etc. to the document being viewed.Those thoughts, however they may be phrased or indicated, are importantto capture. An attorney or other user going through an intellectualproperty document, such as a patent, may indicate that a product,license, etc. does not violate this patent, claims 1, 2, 3, etc. becauseof annotated reasons, or indicate the need to look into this further,and/or indicate the need for a second opinion or any other indication asdesired. Multiple users may each provide separate annotations.

The attorney or other user may review, edit and/or annotate an agreementor other intellectual property document in the editing window 401 forexample by selecting a section, or traverse the document section bysection. (The document may be subdivided previously, currently, and/orsubsequently into sections automatically (e.g., within the XML format)manually, and/or semi-manually.) In the present example, beginning,e.g., with Section 1.1 the user may select a portion of the document inthe editing window 401 to add an annotation or mark-up data.

Reference is now made to FIG. 5, showing an example mark-up window 501,to interact with the user to obtain annotations. The mark-up window 501pops up in response to a user indication that he wishes to annotate adocument (or portion thereof). In the present example, the user mayselect one or more type of pre-defined notations, e.g., “conformance”503, view “notes” 507, view a history 509 of changes to this section,and/or view some user-defined attributes 511, and/or categories or linksto images or web pages, etc.

In the illustrated example, “Harvey Wallenbarger” is the user andselects Section 1.1 in the editing window 401 (shown in FIG. 4). Inresponse to the selection, the system obtains the user's annotation viathe mark-up window 501. In the mark-up window 501, in “conflicts” underthe “conformance” tab 503, the user selects “possible” indicating thatthere is a possible conformance violation; the user may alternatively orin addition type in text comments, e.g., to memorialize concerns aboutthe possible conformance violation. By selecting at the top of themark-up window 501, one or more embodiments of the present inventionincludes a drop down list box or chooser 505 that provides a mechanismfor choosing a related intellectual property document, for example oneof several documents that the user may be working with, thereby relatingthe section and/or its annotation to a section of another (or the same)intellectual property document. In the illustrated example, the usernotes a relationship between the annotated license section 1.1 to asection of another intellectual property document.

Optionally, the other document or other section of the same document isdisplayed in an optional further editing window 601, shown in FIG. 6.Optionally, a selected section 603 of the related document ishighlighted.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention,annotation is realized as a manually-driven approach. For example, auser goes through a document one item at a time and performs anannotation. The process of annotating is preferably a manually-drivenprocess, for several reasons. For example, one person may use the term“cup” but another person may choose to use the designation “a liquidcontaining dispensing container” for the same object. To create anautomated mapping between those two designations may be possible, usingfor example a thesaurus, where the user may add synonyms that expand thescope of the search, etc. Nevertheless, to be able to parse-out thecomplex language that tends to appear in intellectual propertydocuments, and to be able to accurately perform an analysis againstsimilarly complex wording by a completely different person is, may bebetter done manually or semi-automatically.

Reference is now made to FIG. 7. One or more embodiments of the presentinvention optionally provide for a report window 701. The report window701 provides a summary of the mark-ups to, e.g., the selected document.In this example, the report window 701 includes a summary 709 ofmark-ups including a count of sections and types of mark-ups.Optionally, each section 703 and sub-section 705 also is summarized. Asection or subsection summary optionally includes a mark-up summary 707,with, e.g., the standard notation type, any reference(s), author, date,and/or other annotation data. The present example indicates that one ormore users has reviewed this license (or other document), checked itagainst a particular document or documents, and summarized some or allof the mark-up data and associated portions of the document that havebeen annotated.

The optional map window 801 illustrated in FIG. 8 provides a map of thesections of the mark-up document 809 and the related intellectualproperty documents noted in annotations. In the present example, the mapwindow 801 includes a visual representation 803 of each document sectionand a summary 805 of each related document noted in a mark-up. A mapline 807 indicates a relation between document sections and subsections,and a connection 808 is indicated between documents andsections/subsections.

Other components, plug-ins, reports, and/or tools may be provided toview, search, edit, annotate, link and/or mark-up intellectual propertydocuments, in accordance with one or more embodiments of the presentinvention. The view and window functionality, for example, may becombined, omitted, and/or replaced and/or implemented in an alternativeuser interface in alternative embodiments of the present invention.

Reference is again made to FIG. 1. The mark-up data optionally is storedlogically and/or electronically embedded within the original document,e.g., as an annotation. According to one or more embodiments of thepresent invention, the system may host most or all of the databases 121,125, 127, 129, 131 on web servers, for use by any of a large number ofusers. According to one or more embodiment of the present inventionannotated documents are stored, e.g., locally and/or remotely. Accordingto one or more embodiments of the present invention, intellectualproperty documents are linked to annotations, and the documents areshared.

If the users are unaffiliated with each other, however it would beundesirable to have these unrelated users accessing, e.g., the samepatent, marking it up, and physically embedding additional informationtherein. It would not be suitable to make that information available toall of those users. Consequently, according to one or more embodimentsof the present invention, the mark-up data is maintained so that theseparate and/or unrelated users are protected from disclosure to eachother. Accordingly, the mark-up data optionally is separately maintainedfrom the document data and is correlated to a user and/or group ofusers.

Further, the mark-up data preferably is seamlessly associated with thedocument information, and according to one or more embodiments of thepresent invention is preferably presented to the user as a unitarydocument. Despite the unitary appearance, when the user is finishedworking on this document, the document and mark-up informationoptionally is broken into components, optionally each being stored inthe appropriate and/or separate storage. Optionally, the document andmark-ups are stored together.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, there areprovided two (or more) streams of data, corresponding respectively tothe mark-up(s) and the document(s). These data streams are mergedtogether into a single document, and that merged document is presentedto the user and/or worked on as a single logical document. When thatwork is complete or the user otherwise is done, then the document issplit up into two (or more) different streams corresponding to themark-up(s) and the document(s). Preferably, the document is in XMLformat, but could be in other formats.

Reference is made again to FIG. 3, a block diagram for one or moreembodiments of a data manager 201, also showing communications to/from adata server 321 and to/from a data analyzer 323. The data manager 201may, in accordance with one or more embodiments of the presentinvention, provide for splitting and merging annotations and documents.In the illustration of FIG. 3, a document with annotations is split intodata streams via annotation split 305, and merged into an annotateddocument via annotation merge 307. Consider an example data flow throughthe data manager 201: an “XML request” from the data analyzercommunications 323 is received by an object API 319. The “XML request”indicates a particular XML intellectual property document (optionallywith annotations) to be retrieved, e.g., to be accessed by the dataanalyzer. The request is received by annotation merge component 307 inthe data manager 201. The data manager 201 determines that it needs toobtain one (or more) XML document corresponding to the document data forthe intellectual property document, and also one (or more) XML documentcorresponding to the annotation data. The annotation merge component 307issues a request to retrieve these two (or more) documents. Considerthat one of these, for illustration purposes, is a patent document andthe other is annotation data marking up the patent. The annotation dataincludes, within the set of its information, an association between oneor more individual annotations, and the location of the item or sectionwithin the patent document (the “entity”) that the annotation refers to,for example, specific claims in a patent. So, if (as in this example)the user has annotated a particular claim in the specified patent, thenthe annotation includes a reference corresponding to the identifier forthe entity corresponding to that claim. (There are a number of ways bywhich an “entity” within a document could be uniquely identified, e.g.,offset from document start, logical division, etc.) According to one ormore embodiments of the present invention, the annotation mergecomponent 307 processes document data and annotation data (e.g., with anXML parser 308), identifies the one or more entities, within thedocument with a particular annotation, extracts the annotation (e.g., asan XML mark-up fragment), and embeds the annotation within the sectionof the document (e.g., an XML section) for the referenced entity withinthe document.

In accordance with one or more embodiments of the present invention,there are provided two (or more) different documents, one containingannotations and the other containing the document, both including arespective series of entities. The annotation document(s) is broken upinto the individual entities; the documents are parsed and it isdetermined where the annotation entities go in the document; and thedocument is fattened into a marked-up document. The fattened mark-updocument is then returned to the data analyzer as the document in theproper format (e.g., XML) via data analyzer communication 323.

The data analyzer then may, at that point, work with the mark-updocument as if it is a single document. That the marked-up documentoriginated from two or three or more different sources, according to oneor more embodiments of the present invention, is transparent to the dataanalyzer. According to one or more embodiments of the present invention,the data analyzer receives, processes, and/or acts on the marked-updocument as a unitary document, and when done, returns it as a unitarydocument. Optionally, the data analyzer works with the documentencompassing more than one file, e.g., separate document and annotationdata, multiple files for document sections, etc.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, the datamanager 201 includes one or more annotation split components 305,optionally driven by a mark-up schema 317. The mark-up schema 317identifies which types of entities belong in a document (e.g., a patent)and which types of entities belong in an annotation. In scanning throughthe mark-up or expanded document, the system may identify the one ormore entities that are an annotation entity. The schema identifies theannotation entities, such as in XML. Further, the system can identifythat a particular annotation entity is related to a particular parentdocument (or entity within a parent document) and may obtain the uniqueidentifier for that parent associated back with the annotation entity.It may then start building a new annotation document. So, in this waythe system then supports the collapsing of the expanded mark-up documentfrom the analyzer back into its normal form, extracting the annotations,building another annotation document, and then inserting data for theannotation and/or document back into the Data Server.

In the case of a patent, for example, the original document may bemarked as read only, so the user cannot edit the original document.Optionally, the annotation split logic determines whether the documentis read-only, thereby avoiding the need to examine edits to the originaldocument, e.g. the original patent document. Consequently, for aread-only document, the annotation split logic 305 may review themark-up document to extract the annotation information.

Reference is now made to FIG. 9, illustrating an example block diagramof one potential embodiment of the data server 205. According to one ormore embodiments of the present invention, one or more data servers 105retrieve/store documents and/or annotation data. According to one ormore embodiments of the present invention, the intellectual propertydocuments are stored separately from the annotation data. If desired,stored documents may be further subdivided, e.g., by intellectualproperty type (e.g., patent, license, trademark), or file format (e.g.,XML, .TIFF, .DOC)

Each data server may advantageously provide an object API 319 which,inter alia receives communications to/from a data manager 927, toinsert, update, delete, and/or request data in a format appropriate tothe document(s), annotation and/or image data, e.g., XML. Hence, wheredocuments and annotations are stored as, e.g., XML formatted datastreams, the data server may act as a repository for document and/orannotation data.

When an XML data insertion or update occurs, the XML data advantageouslymay be stored within an XML repository 905, e.g., as a new revision ofthe document. The data server 205 receives the document or documents forstorage, e.g., through an XML update request. An XML update request isreceived through the object API 319 and is optionally sent to a dataversioning manager 917 to handle version updates.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, revisionsmay be managed by a data versioning manager 917. For example, when adata request occurs, the specified data may be retrieved from the dataversioning manager 917, the default optionally being to retrieve thelatest changes; however, a prior version may be specified within thedata request. The changed document, for example the annotation document,is inserted into, e.g., a data versioning manager 917, to accomplishversion control. There are several appropriate varieties of commerciallyavailable version control software. A version control program generallycompares the revised document against the prior copy, makes a list ofthe changes, and associates a new revision with those changes.Optionally, upon changing or updating a document, a change notification923 may be initiated for use by other processes.

The object API 319 may provide for services, e.g., to insert, update,delete, and/or retrieve binary data (such as for images). Such binarydata advantageously may be managed by the data versioning manager 917,and optionally a new revision may be created on update. The binary datatype may be stored advantageously with the binary data when inserted orupdated, e.g., in image data files 907. The various standard image types(e.g., JPEG, GIF, TIFF, etc.) optionally may be known to the system aspredefined data types. Optionally if an image is requested in adifferent known format than it is stored, conversion to the requestedformat may be performed, e.g., during retrieval; the may be doneadvantageously by one or more format converters 925.

One of the other aspects of the optional version control system is thatit is possible to label a particular version as having a given name. Thelabel then readily allows the system to associate a version of theannotation data with a version of the document data. (The annotationsand the document may be changing at different rates.) One or moreembodiments of the present invention provide the ability to create anassociated name with a revision, and the version control allows thesystem to then associate the various into version streams that arechanging at different rates.

The document being edited and/or marked up, e.g., a license agreement,may be changing at a very rapid rate initially but then those versionsmay slow down as the license matures. Conversely, the annotations maystart to grow rapidly or there may be a period when a company is workingwith a particular sub-licensing arrangement where those changes areoccurring rapidly as well. The XML document received from the dataanalyzer is then fit into the data versioning manager, 917. Relevantinformation optionally is stored into a repository 905 and that reflectsone part of the life cycle of that document.

The optional XML repository 905 provides the data versioning manager'slog file storage, for change records. It may use a form of datacompression that is typically used in version control systems wherestoring the changes that have happened from one revision to the next ofthe document.

When XML data is inserted or updated in an XML document, it may beparsed by an XML parser. Optionally, a configuration data section 919may be used to identify document structure. An index schema 913, forexample, may be used to identify XML tags that the XML parser 308 usesto break up the document into major sections; and a separate index maybe generated, e.g. by an index generator 915, and may be maintained foreach such section. During parsing, the various elements of the XML datastream may be identified. Their contents further may be parsed toextract the individual words within each element. These extracted wordsmay be compared against a table of unimportant words. If not matched inthe table, the word, together with the unique (fully qualified) XMLdocument name, plus its new revision number, if any, are may be storedin an index SQL database 903. Each entry (e.g. row) in the table may beidentified (via e.g., primary key) by the word, the document name, andthe revision, or in any other appropriate way. This table may contain aseparate field (e.g., column) for each section of the XML document,which may contain a count of the number of times (e.g. frequency) theword appears within that section. This realization may enable an indexsearcher 911 to place the most likely candidates at the beginning of thesearch results. Other realizations are possible, and will be appreciatedby one of skill in the art. The data server optionally includes athesaurus 909, which may reference and/or manage a table of synonyms tobe used, inter alia, in broadening the field of search. Thesaurus 909may maintain relevant data in any appropriate form, such as thesaurusSQL data 901.

When XML or binary data or other data is inserted, updated, or deletedin a document, a change notification 923 event optionally may begenerated. This may be broadcast to registered listeners (typically oneor more data managers). The change notification event may advantageouslyprovide underlying support for replication, and/or may be used fornotifying a user of modifications to a document that they may bereviewing.

Reference is made to FIG. 10, a block diagram of one embodiment of anarchitecture for the data analyzer 203. The data analyzer communicatesvia the data manager to one or more data servers on the backend of thesystem. From a user's perspective, one optionally is interacting withthe data analyzer 203 via a user interface, e.g., looking at a directoryand/or search view 1001 in order to locate, edit, or annotate adocument. For example, a user interface may present a directory as anavigable tree, allowing them to see one or more data managers inconnection with respective data servers. Optionally, a data manager maythen be responsible for presenting a relevant part of the navigabletree. Other means of displaying documents are equally appropriate, e.g.,the data analyzer may show a list of the patents by year issued, byclassification, etc. An interface is provided so that the user canidentify a document they want to work with. For example, a user may do asearch, e.g. for all documents containing the term “cup”, and bepresented with a list of search results, in order to access documents.

In any event, the user identifies the document of interest, and arequest for the document is sent by the data analyzer to the versionmanager 1003, e.g., for the latest version. In some cases, especially ifthe user is interested in looking at historical changes, then they maywant to obtain a prior version of that document. The version may beimportant if there is an association between the version of annotationdata and the version of the document data. Optionally, the systemretrieves multiple versions, e.g., to illustrate a particular moment inthe history of that document. The “XML Request” may be sent as a datamanager communication 1021 to a document manager 1005, and the requestedXML document may be returned. The document manager 1005 reads and thenstores that document into the document workspace 1007 according to oneor more embodiments of the present invention.

In the document worked on by the data analyzer 203, the annotation datapreferably is already merged with the original document data. The mergeddocument may be optionally stored into a document workspace 1007. Thepurpose of the document workspace 1007 is so that a user may remotelywork on a document, such as on a notebook computer not connected to anetwork. The data may be local in the workspace. Hence, if there is adisconnect from the original data sources, it is irrelevant in terms ofworking with the document.

When the remote user finishes edits or annotations on those one or moredocuments, they may then check those documents back into the data serverthrough the data analyzer and the data manager. When a document is to beworked with, it may be extracted from the document workspace 1007.Optionally, the document to be worked on is broken down into elements,if any. The document workspace 1007 may be, for example, a file in adirectory or a set of directories on a disk. To break the document intoelements, according to one or more embodiments of the present invention,the document is extracted from the document workspace, and fed into theXML parser 308 within a document object model 1011. The document objectmodel 1011 may be, e.g., standard binary representation or objectrepresentation of XML. An annotation schema 1017 may be referred towithin either the XML parser 308 and/or an XML generator 1013, forexample in the process of conversion to and from the object model 1019.

Once the XML data is broken down into an internal object representation,it is possible to look at an individual element, and determine, e.g.what is the content of that element in terms of text, name of the tag,text of the entity, tag name for the entity, and/or parent entity forit.

The merged or annotated document advantageously may be provided in XMLformat. The XML document is a structure with a balanced mark-up tag;each tag specifies a start and end of the section, and inside a sectionthere may be nested one or more start/end of another section one. Eachone of these start/end blocks may be a node. Each entity within thatbecomes a sub-node of a tree, creating an in-memory representation ofthe document tree that can be traversed to the parent node, child node,siblings, etc. The XML object model 1019 then contains the document dataand child nodes for each one of the paragraphs or items that have beenannotated. An annotation node contains the annotation data. It containsthe type of a mark-up, e.g., “conformance”, link to another document;textual node, etc.

Optionally, the user is provided one or more views in order to assistwith analysis of the document. Each of the different views 113, 115,117, 119 works with the merged document, according to one or moreembodiments of the present invention. The views 113, 115, 117, 119 maydetermine document format, e.g., by a reference to a document Schema1009. The user selects the function he wishes to perform on a document,e.g., view a report of the document 113; view a map of the document,links and mark-ups 115; view annotations 117; and/or edit the document119.

Reference is made to both FIGS. 4 and 10. The editing view 119, andediting window 201 illustrate one example of editing an intellectualproperty document, here, the license. The editing view examines the treestructure of the document or a nesting of levels within a document.Here, there are articles at the outermost levels, sections within that,and perhaps each section has clauses with sub-clauses. They may bebroken down separately. In this case, there is an article at theouter-most level, which is at the same level as the preamble, nestedwithin that article 1, “Grant of Licenses”, there is article 1.1 “TradeSecret License”. The entire text for “Trade Secret Licenses” may becontained within one node in the document object model. The “TradeSecret License” tag may be contained elsewhere within that node andembedded therein; “1.1 Trade Secret License” is a node, the child nodeof that is the text of the paragraph, etc. At another child node ofSection 1.1, there is provided a conformance mark-up (displayed asillustrated in FIG. 5 in the mark-up window 501). The data and/orattributes within the conformance mark-up would indicate that there is apossible conflict, together with the contents of the text within thatchild node or within a further child node thereof. This mark-upinformation for the illustrated conformance item may be associated withSection 1.1 as a separate node.

With regard to the illustrated Section 1.1, the user may select the nodeindicated as selected, e.g., by a frame 405, e.g. by a double click orclick inside the frame 405. The view may change to an editing view suchas a frame with scroll bars. The user may modify the content of theselected information. The system automatically updates the originaldocument information.

Reference is again made to both FIGS. 5 and 10, illustrating an examplemark-up window 501 and annotation view 117 within one or moreembodiments of a data analyzer architecture. The annotation view 117 andmark-up window 501 display the mark-up associated with document, and/ordocuments to which the document has been linked. For example, thesystems traverse the object-model tree in memory, locate annotationsthat exist within that tree, and locate the particular correspondingannotation(s) for items at a given level within the tree. It is alsoaware of the document object model in this example.

Reference is again made to both FIGS. 8 and 10, illustrating the mapview 115 together with the map window 801. The map view 115 reviews eachof the nodes within the selected document and displays them for example,within a tree or a map format. In the present example, it displays atree of boxes representing nodes within the document, nodes of otherdocuments connected from the selected document, and/or annotationsassociated with the document; and lines connecting the boxes together,representing links from the document (or nodes therein) to otherdocuments (or nodes therein) and/or associated annotations. It isworking off of the object model in this example.

Reference is again made to both FIGS. 7 and 10. The report view 113 andreport window 701 look at different elements of the document, nodes, andannotations and pull them together into a textual representation and/orsummary.

Advantageously, each of the views 113, 115, 117, 119 is provided as aplug-in to the system architecture, or similar fashion, to enable viewsto be added, omitted, supplemented and/or combined. Other views may beprovided, and the examples herein are provided merely for illustrationof the underlying principals. Further, although it is advantageous forthe views and/or data analyzer to work on one document as a whole, thedocument could be provided in multiple parts and/or with separateannotations.

Reference is now made to FIG. 11 showing an example embodiment of anoptional data flow for splitting an annotated document. In thisconceptual illustration, the annotation data stream 1123 is separatefrom the document data stream 1121, and the annotations and documentsare stored separately. The annotated document 1127 is received by theannotation split logic 1111 and is broken apart into document outputdata stream 1121 and annotation output data stream 1123, e.g., forstorage, e.g., in an XML document repository 1101 and an XML annotationrepository 1103. The document is parsed, e.g., by an XML parser 308, anda document mark-up schema 1115 is used to help identify nodes within thedocument and/or annotations. If implemented using XML, tags areassociated with the document, and the tags that are associated with theannotation.

Optionally, multiple versions of the document and/or annotation aremanaged, e.g., by respective versioning data management systems 1105,1107.

Preferably, any kind of annotation data, and/or any kind of documentdata, and/or format may be accepted. They are advantageously convertedinto XML, and then converted from XML into their native format.

FIG. 12 further illustrates that there may be two or more input datastreams 1203, 1205, retrieved from the XML document repository 1101 andXML annotation repository 1103, for a particular marked-up document,which are merged together in accordance with one or more embodiments ofthe present invention. At least one set of the input data streamscontains document data 1203, and at least one other set of the inputdata streams contains the annotation data 1205 to be applied to suchdocument data 1203. Annotation merge logic 1201 identifies locations inthe document into which to associate annotation data. If the document isXML, e.g., an XML parser 308 may utilize the document mark-up schema1115 to identify appropriate locations.

If more than one document is embedded within a stream, the system mayextract that document from multiple documents embedded within a singlestream, in order to obtain a single-document stream in any event.

The document data may optionally be provided in multiple documentstreams. In the case of the USPTO database, data from 1976 to 2000 isstored in a formatted character mode, which is non-standard and awkwardto handle. This information is stored as provided by the USPTO, inmultiple files per patent. Those files contain the abstract information,information about the inventor, a brief description of the claims,drawings, etc., so there are several documents for a given patent.Optionally, all of the annotations that relate to one other documentcould be stored in one annotation stream, and all of the annotationsrelating to yet a different document optionally may be stored in aseparate annotation data stream. There is no requirement that allannotations for a document come from or be stored into a singleannotation file.

Annotation merge logic 1201 inputs the input data streams 1203, 1205,and creates a mark-up representation of the document data, containing,referencing or including the annotation data, whether by structure orreference for associating the annotation data with its correspondingelements within the document data.

FIG. 12 further illustrates a document input data stream 1203 containingdocument data, and an annotation input data stream 1205 containingannotation data. The annotation merge logic 1201 outputs the result ofthe merge, i.e., a marked-up output data stream 1207. The representationof marked up output data can reference the annotation information inmany different ways. XML is fairly flexible and one advantageously maydefine the annotations at the top of the document as entities.Accordingly, one may take text as written, paste it into the XMLdocument and then re-parse the document, to further evaluate the XMLstructure.

The XML element is a macro that may be cut, pasted and inserted intoanother section of the document by reference. Hence, one alternativeaccording to one or more embodiments of the present invention is to takethe annotation data, define each one of them as elements at the top ofthe file, and then simply embed a reference to that element within eachof the paragraphs where it needs to be expanded. That provides themark-up copy, and it is semantically equivalent to embedding the actualmark-up entities within the entities that they refer to in the originaldocument.

There are several alternative ways to include the annotations, e.g.,write the annotation to a separate XML file, and use an includestatement to include the contents of that XML file. The concept of thedifferent ways of expanding into the mark-up document may be realignedin different ways, whether by inclusion of an element, the macro-typeelement, by doing an include to pull it in from another document, or byexpanding out the XML code for such representation further containing,referencing or including the annotation data.

There are a number of alternative ways in which the data may beprovided. The data stream could be, for example, a named pipe, data froma firewall, data from a disk, or data from a database, etc.

According to one or more alternative embodiments of the invention, thedocument data and/or the annotation data are stored in multiple dataservers, and may be accessed via one or more data managers. For example,data might be distributed among servers physically located, e.g., at aglobal headquarters of an information service, a corporate headquartersof a company, of a small law office, and/or a personal computer.

According to one or more alternative embodiments, the document dataand/or annotation data and/or marked up document are provided as datastreams. If a data stream contains image data or other binary data, oneof the data streams may include data for associating the image or binarydata with the annotation data and/or document data. This is useful if,for example, there are images that are associated with many of thepatents, trademarks, etc.

The image/binary data stream is not necessarily distinct from thedocument data stream or, if appropriate, the annotation data stream. Thedocument itself may contain a reference to an image, and/or theannotation itself may contain the reference. In one or more embodimentsof the present invention, on the other hand, the image/binary datastream might or might not be distinct from the document data or theannotation data.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention,annotation data may contain an association of an external data streamof, e.g. document data. The annotation data may have an association toexternal data, e.g., a hyperlink to a URL web page, a fully-qualifiedfile name on a network server, the document, a name of a program, a nameof a command string that can be executed through a command shell tostart, e.g., a computer aided design (CAD) system with a particular CADfile, etc.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention,associations may be formed between the version of an annotation with aversion of the document. Preferably, one or more of the input datastreams is from a versioning system, where there is provided a versioncontrol system, with multiple versions of a document and/or annotation.The system and/or user selects one of those document versions and/orannotation data, from the versioning system. Where both document dataand annotation data are provided from a versioning system, there may beone or multiple versioning systems.

Marked up input data streams may contain annotation text, or may berelated to a stream that contains annotation text. According to one ormore embodiments of the present invention, a marked up document may bereceived as an input data stream or marked up document coming in to aninput data stream. Annotation data may be included that is associatedwith, embedded in, or connected with the input data stream. The inputdata streams may include, inter alia, annotation data, and/or a markedup document representation. The system is capable of parsing such markedup document representation. The system may extract from such marked updocument representation the annotation data which may be placed into oneor more output data streams. The annotations are optionally strippedout, and made separate and distinct from the marked up data stream.

The system can review the marked up document, and may extract therelationship between the annotation data and the elements of thedocument.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, there isprovided a user interface. When the user selects a different kind ofannotation or when the content of the annotation changes, for example,the user may dynamically change how a particular user interface displaysthe information that it is working with.

Depending on the type of the annotation, e.g. a conformance test, one ormore parts of the user interface may display themselves differently thanfor history of the document. Consider that something is displayed in auser interface window. The user selects one of several differentannotations that they want to work with. The screen displays theinformation they are working, as it changes, in one form or another.

FIG. 13 illustrates an example of an annotated XML document 1301,according to one or more embodiments of the present invention. Theannotated XML document 1301 includes one or more document elements 1303embedded therein or otherwise associated therewith, with document data.One or more annotations 1305 are embedded or otherwise associatedtherewith. The annotation 1305 includes one or more annotation elements1307, which reference data, a document, an external data source, etc.The annotation element 1307 may have a link 1309 to zero, one or moreexternal data streams. In this example, a link 1309 is provided to datastreams including a document element data 1313 within another document1311; a URL 1315, e.g., “http://www.www.xyz/page”; and other externaldata source 1317, e.g., an executable shell script, image file, diagram,text file, document, or other file (voice, audio, video, binary, etc.)

Reference is now made to FIGS. 14A-B, illustrating an example flow chartfor merging document data together with annotation data to produce amarked-up representation of the document. At step 1401, the user selectsa document to be marked-up. At step 1403, the system determines whetherthe currently located document is the correct document for marking-up.If not, at step 1405, the system searches for the correct document. Oncethe correct document is obtained, at block 1407 the system determineswhether the current version is the correct version. If not, the systemsearches for the current version of the document at block 1409. Once thecorrect version of the current document is obtained, at block 1411, thesystem determines whether there is any annotation data for the selecteddocument, for the particular user. If the current annotation data is notthe correct annotation data, at block 1413, the system continues tosearch for the annotation data corresponding to the selected document,block 1417. At block 1415, if the current version of the annotation datais not the correct version of annotation data, then at block 1419 thesystem continues to search for the correct version of the annotationdata.

At block 1421, the system has the correct version of bother the selecteddocument and the annotation data, and the system proceeds to place thedocument data into a mark-up representation of the document. At block1423, the system loops to check for additional items of annotation data.For another item of annotation data, at block 1425 the system locatesthe corresponding element within the mark-up representation of thedocument, and at block 1429, the system, associates the annotation datawith the corresponding element of the document. When there are nofurther items of annotation data, at block 1427 the system provides theuser with a marked-up representation of the document. Processing ends atblock 1431.

Reference is now made to FIG. 15, illustrating one example of splittingof a marked-up representation of a document into annotation data anddocument data. At block 1501, the system obtains a marked-uprepresentation of the document. In blocks 1503, 1507, 1511, 1515 and1517, the system loops to obtain each element in the marked-uprepresentation of the document, determine the annotation(s) in theelement, and split out and store the annotations. In blocks 1505 and1509, the system separately stores the document data and annotationdata. Hence, in block 1503, the system, determines whether there isanother element in the document. If so, the system obtains the nextelement in the marked-up representation of the document at block 1507.At block 1511, the system checks whether the element includes one ormore annotations. If so, the system stores the annotation(s) in theannotation data at block 1515. At block 1517, the system stores theelement in the document data. The system loops back to block 1503 forthe next element in the document. Once done processing elements in thedocument, the system stores the document data, as a new version, forthis user, at block 1505; and stores the annotation data, as a newversion, for this user, at block 1509. At block 1513, the system returnsfrom processing.

FIG. 16 is a linked diagram illustrating an example of linked, annotatedintellectual property documents and data, according to one or moreembodiments of the present invention. Here, one or more users has linkedtogether several related intellectual property documents, in thisexample including a text document 1601 (titled “Power Projects”),technical description documents 1603, 1605 (titled “Jet Engine” and“Turbine Engine”), a patent infringement analysis 1607, and severalpatents 1609 a-h. In this example, associations between two documentsare illustrated by links 1613. A document may be linked one way or bothways. A link may be to/from the document generally, or a specificlocation in the document. Each link may include an annotation 1611.Preferably, the annotation includes any user comments, user-suppliedtext, other user-supplied digital data, user-defined attributes (e.g.,company's patent, competitor's patent, project name), history, etc. Inthe present example, a user could select the “Power Projects”, view thelinks and embedded annotations regarding the “Jet Engine” and “TurbineEngine” documents. The user could select one or more of the links tolinked other intellectual property documents. The process continuesthroughout the chain of linked documents. The user optionally may selectyet another intellectual property document and create a link withoptional annotation. An intellectual property document may bemultiply-linked, and may link to itself if desired.

FIG. 17 is a linked diagram illustrating another example of annotatedintellectual property documents and data, according to one or moreembodiments of the present invention. The subject of this example is alicense 1701 including multiple terms 1713. The license generally islinked both ways to a related product document 1715. The licenseincludes annotations with internal notes 1705, 1707 on two terms; anannotation of a term with multiple versions of proposed changes to alicense term 1709; an annotation relating to two terms with a digitizedvoice recording of a negotiation 1711; and a link both ways to a relatedpatent, trademark or other intellectual property document 1703, withannotations 1611.

FIGS. 18 A-B is an example flow chart illustrating an interaction withthe user to obtain annotations and links for an intellectual propertydocument, in accordance with one or more embodiments of the presentinvention. At step 1801, the document to be marked-up is provided to theuser, for example via a display. The document may have been previouslyobtained, for example via a search, browse, or other retrievalcomponent, tool or function. At step 1802, the system interacts with theuser to determine a portion of the document to be marked-up. Thedocument may have been previously divided into sections and/orsubsections, for example, that are candidates for marking up.Alternatively, the user may, e.g., perform a click-and-select functionto selected a portion. At step 1804, the system optionally indicates thedetermined portion, for example, by highlighting the portion, via apop-up-window, via special color, etc. At step 1806, the systeminteracts with the user to obtain a mark-up for this portion of thedocument. For example, the system may provided a pull-down menu, apop-up window, a particular font, etc. The permissible contents ofmark-up to be applied may be customized by an administrative user, maybe free-form, and/or may have a check-list of pre-defined elements, etc.According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, the usermay select and/or enter the mark-up information. At step 1808, thesystem determines whether the mark-up is to include one or morereferences to an intellectual property document. If so, then at step1810, the system provides that the user can locate and/or link from thepresent document to the intellectual property document. In the presentexample, the system provides a search and/or browse tool to locate thedocument. At step 1814, the system interacts with the user to indicate aselected portion of the document to be linked to. The selected portionmay be some or all of the current document, and/or another document. Atstep 1818, the system saves a reference, e.g., a link, pointer,identifier, for the other document and any selected portion, togetherwith the associated mark-up. At step 1812, the system saves the mark-up,together with any optional reference to another document and/or theindicated portion thereof, into, for example, temporary storage. Atblock 1816, the system checks whether there are any further mark-ups tobe applied to the current document, and if so, loops back to step 1802.

If there are no further mark-ups and if the document and mark-ups are tobe saved, then at block 1820, the system determines whether themarked-up document was edited and/or was editable. If so, the documentis stored at step 1822. At step 1824, the system determines whetherthere is one or more saved mark-ups to be applied to the document. Ifnot, then the system exits. If there are mark-ups, then at step 1826,the system determines whether the mark-ups are stored separately fromthe document. If not, then at step 1828 the system stores the savedmark-ups together with the document. Otherwise, at step 1830, the systemstores the saved mark-ups separately from the document, and at step 1832stores data representative of the mark-up locations within the document.The function then exits processing.

FIG. 19 is a flow chart illustrating one example of traversing fromintellectual property document to intellectual property document, vialinks associated with the document and/or sections thereof, optionallyhaving annotations. At step 1901, the system obtains the document, anddisplays the document together with annotations (or indicationsthereof). At step 1903, the system loops for the user to select anannotation and/or section of the document associated with a link. Atstep 1905, the system displays the annotation information, if any. Atstep 1907, the system determines whether the annotation (or selectedsection) includes or is associated with one or more links. If not, thesystem loops back to step 1903. If there is at least one link associatedwith the annotation (or selected section), step 1907, then the systemloops at step 1909 until the user selects a link. When the user selectsa link, then at step 1911, the system determines the location of thelinked document (or section thereof) via reference information, forexample, stored or associated with the annotation, obtains the linkeddocument (or section thereof), and displays the just-obtained document,optionally together with any annotation indications. The system thenloops back to step 1903, enabling the user thereby to continue totraverse the related linked documents.

Reference is now made to FIG. 20, illustrating an example architecturefor use in connection with one or more embodiments of the presentinvention. In the present example, a computer 2001 hosts one or moreannotations components 2003 and one or more linkages components 2005.The annotations component has one or more of the following: a componentto apply an annotation 2013 to a document; a component to edit anannotation 2015; and a component for document and/or section selection2017. The apply annotation component 2013 interacts with the user tocreate an annotation, e.g., using menus, free form text, cut-and-pasteof text, web pages and/or hyper links; and to apply that annotation tothe document (or to the selected section of the document). Theannotation may be applied, e.g., by inserting the annotation into thedocument, by saving the annotation separately in an annotations database2011 and inserting a reference to the annotation into the document,and/or by saving metadata associating the reference and the document (orselected section thereof), etc. The edit annotation component 2015interacts with the user to edit an existing annotation, e.g., usingmenus, free form text, cut-and-paste, etc., and optionally to save theedited annotation. The edited annotation may be saved, e.g., by savingthe edited annotation with the document, by saving the edited annotationseparately and optionally updating a reference to the annotation intothe document, and/or by updating metadata associating the reference andthe document (or selected section thereof), etc. The document and/orsection selection component 2017 interacts with the user to determine aportion, portions or the entirety of the document to be associated withthe annotation.

The linkages component(s) 2005 include one or more of: a component toestablish, indicate and/or remove one or more links 2019, a component toallow the user to traverse one or more links 2021, and a component fordocument and/or section selection. The document and/or section selectioncomponent 2023 interacts with the user to determine a portion, portionsor the entirety of one or more documents to be associated with a link. Alink may be between one or more documents or sections thereof. Adocument may be linked back to itself or a section therein. Thecomponent to establish, indicate and/or remove a link 2019 interactswith the user to determine the document and/or section to link from, andthe document and/or section to link to. The link may be established orindicated, e.g., by inserting a link (e.g., reference, pointer, etc.)into the document, by saving the links separately in a links database2009 and inserting a reference to the link into the document, and/or bysaving metadata associating the link and the document (or selectedsection thereof), etc. Optionally, links and annotations are stored inassociation. Optionally, links are stored within the associatedannotations, or vice versa. The component to traverse links 2021determines one or more links, if any, associated with a selecteddocument and/or selected portions thereof, optionally one or moreannotations associated therewith, and optionally the document title ordescription at the node of the link. Further, the links component 2021interacts with the user to determine which link to traverse; to obtainthe link (pointer, reference, etc.) to the linked document; and toretrieve the linked document and provide to the user. With the retrieveddocument, the user may traverse further links therefrom. According toone or more embodiments of the present invention, one or more users 2027are local communicating with the computer 2001, and/or are connectedover a network, e.g., the Internet 1005. In the illustrated example, thedocuments database 2007, links database 2009, and annotations database2011 are local to the computer 2001; a further documents database 2025is accessed via the Internet 1005.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention,attributes associated with an intellectual property document are storedapart from the intellectual property document. For example, attributesmay be stored as metadata. Optionally, attributes are stored inconjunction with other annotations associated with the intellectualproperty documents. A unique identifier is used to locate the relatedmetadata. A serial number, issue number, other unique identifier, orportion thereof, optionally in combination with, e.g., a country code orintellectual property type indicator, may be used to provide a uniqueidentifier.

A type of attribute may reflect that the intellectual property documentsare product-centric and/or services-centric. For many companies orconcerns, everything they sell is tied to a product or a service. Othertraits or information may be used as an attribute type. Once a user isable to group intellectual property documents, and label theintellectual property documents as being related to one or moreattributes and attribute types, then the attributes and attribute typesmay be used for various applications, e.g., searching, generatingreports, etc. Hence, attribute types may include one or more of: aproduct, a service, an actor (a person or entity who performed anaction), a user, the current owner (as provided by the user, e.g., notderived by the system from inherent fields or other data), an indicationthat the patent is the company's or a competitor's, a project name,and/or an indication of level of conformance.

Referring once more to the example of product/services as a type ofattribute, assume that a user has determined one or more particularproducts or services to be associated as an attribute with multipleintellectual property documents. A user can identify the patent(s)and/or other intellectual property associated with a particular productor service by providing information identifying the product or service.Conversely, by identifying a particular patent, for example, a user maydetermine the products that are relevant to the patent.

Consider for example, that a user wishes to analyze a patent from theperspective that the user owns the patent. In this example, the userspecifies the patent, and determines that the patent relates to aparticular component. The user may then request a report to see allpatents associated with the particular component. Assume further thatthe attribute type of component is a sub-type of the product attributetype. Hence, the particular component relates to a particular product.The user may then request a report to see all patents associated withthe particular product.

By providing one or more attributes and/or attribute types by, e.g.,pull-down menu, tree structure, or check-list, a user may easilydetermine the attribute or attribute type that is desired. For a userwith a product- or service-oriented viewpoint, the attribute types mayrelate to products and/or services. The attributes and/or attributetypes may be pre-defined by the system, and/or may be user-customized,e.g., by an administrative user.

An intellectual property document may be associated with one or moreattribute types, and an attribute type associated therewith may beassigned one or more attributes. For example, a patent for a chemicaldye may have a product type of “clothing, food, and hair care.” A queryfor intellectual property documents related to the product “clothing”would return results including the patent for the chemical dye.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, a companyor user may customize the attributes and/or attribute types. Accordingto one or more embodiments of the present invention, one or moreattributes and/or attribute types may be locked so as to be unchangeableexcept by an appropriately authorized user. An attribute optionallypermits addition of free-form information by the user, e.g., text, URLto a file, a reference to another intellectual property document, animage file, a video file, an audio file, or a file made using anothercomputer software application.

Optionally, one or more attributes to be associated with a particularintellectual property document may be determined through, e.g., ascanned or typed SKU, model number and/or a manufacturer batch number.

Optionally, information regarding attributes and attribute types can beexported or otherwise provided for use in connection with another entitythat has a separate collection of intellectual property documents.Hence, according to one or more embodiments of the present invention, acompany may send its attribute data to an outside IP boutique for use inconnection with the IP boutique's intellectual property documents.

Optionally, attributes may be assigned to one or more intellectualproperty documents within a project grouping, individually and/or as agroup. As a further option, an intellectual property document may beincluded in more than one project.

One or more embodiments of the present invention provide for utilizingthe attributes as a filter. For example, the user could filter theintellectual property documents and view all documents that have aspecified attribute or attribute(s). Filtration utilizing attributescould be used, for example, with searching, retrieving, reporting and/orviewing. Optionally, filtration could utilize one or a combination of:(i) attribute content; (ii) type of attribute; (iii) sub-types ofattribute types; (iv) content of a field in the intellectual propertydocument; (v) type of a field in the intellectual property document;and/or (vi) information derived from one or more of the foregoing, e.g.,current owner of record. Optionally, where attributes are stored asmetadata, the metadata can be searched to determine the intellectualproperty document(s) having specified attributes.

The determination of intellectual property documents included in areport generated using attributes and/or attribute types as a filter canbe very flexible. One or more of the attributes and/or attribute typesassociated with the subjects of a report may be included as or the basisfor information in the report. For example, a report could count thenumber of trademarks owned by a company for each of several products orservice lines.

In accordance with one or more embodiments of the present invention, theattributes may be provided in a hierarchy structure with attributes,sub-attributes, sub-sub-attributes and so forth to create a treestructure. An intellectual property document or file may be associatedor tagged with anyone or more of these attributes and sub- orsub-sub-attributes. At the time of association or tagging, theintellectual property document or file is simultaneously orautomatically associated or tagged with all of the attributes that areat a level higher than the particular attribute or attributes with whichthe intellectual property document or file is associated or tagged. Inother words, the intellectual property document or file adopts orinherits the tag or associated profile of the attribute or attributeswith which it is associated or tagged. In this manner, all of theattributes that otherwise would have been selected in a step-by-stepmanner may be assigned simultaneously and automatically by tagging theintellectual property document or file with not only the selectedattribute(s), but all of the other attributes that are at a level higherthan the particular attribute(s) with which the document has beenassociated.

The following provides an example use of one or more embodiments of thepresent invention. Initially, ABC Corp. decides to intake theintellectual property portfolio of a company it acquired, XYZ Corp. Inthis example, the XYZ Corp. intellectual property assets have not yetbeen assigned attributes. The ABC Corp. user performs a search for allpatents and trademarks with XYZ Corp. as the current owner of record.This provides a list (for example) of 2,000 patents and 200 trademarks.The user sorts the list, first by type of intellectual property; theuser then sorts the patents by class/sub-class, and the trademarks byInternational Class. The user then selects, drags and drops, intovarious projects, the sorted intellectual property. (The projects can beworked on by other users, and provide a convenient way to subdividelarge numbers of documents.) By working through documents within aproject, a user then may assign attributes to the intellectual propertytherein. For example, consider that one project has patents for copiertechnology. The user selects one or more patents in the project andchooses to assign attributes. The system prompts the user to provide anattribute type, e.g., product. Attribute types may be customized toinclude, in this example, Company, Division and Technology Type.Acceptable attributes for the selected attribute type(s) are displayedto the user; optionally, the user may type in text. In our example, theuser selects:

Attribute Type Attribute Company ABC Corp. Division Electrical DivisionTechnology type copier technology Product Model 123

This process is eventually performed for all of the documents in theproject. Other searches and/or sorting can be performed if desired tobetter identify documents to be grouped into projects. Further, theintake can be performed on a periodic basis, for example when patentsand registrations issue. Portions of the process may be automated ifpreferred. Optionally, a selection of a particular product (e.g., modelnumber, component name) as a product type will cause the higher-levelattribute types to inherit the appropriate attributes. For example, aselection of “Copier Technology” causes the “company” and “division”attribute types to inherit the attributes “ABC Corp.” and “ElectricalDivision”, respectively. Optionally, an intellectual document may havemultiple attributes for an attribute type.

Continuing with the same example, a user later wants to retrieve a listof trademarks for a particular product. A search can be performed forsuch trademarks by, e.g., the attribute type “product” and the attributeof a specified model number; and the search will return, as results, thetrademarks that were assigned to the specified model number. Thissearch, filtered by an attribute, optionally may be combined withsearching based on pre-existing or inherent document field contents,such as “country,” to yield, e.g., a list of trademarks on a particularproduct sorted alphabetically and by country. As another example on thepatent side, a search for a particular product would yield a list ofpatents (if any) relevant to the product.

Similarly, an intake can be performed on copyrights. Optionally, thecopyright information is linked to an electronic copy of the copyrightdocument. The user can retrieve a list of ingested copyrights, e.g., fora particular product. Documents and/or electronic representations ofinformation relating to other intellectual property are optionallyincluded in the system. For example, trade secret-related informationmay be reflected in documents specifying treatment of building access,etc.; technical data rights may be reflected in licenses; contracts maybe reflected in licenses, non-disclosure agreements, memoranda ofunderstanding, joint development agreements, joint venture agreements,etc.

The use of the optional multiple-layer attributes permits a user tosearch, retrieve, or otherwise access one or more intellectual propertydocuments via one or more attributes within the multiple layers.Similarly, by accessing the document(s), the user can easily determineeach attribute within the multiple layers. For example, the useraccessing a user interface patent assigned the attribute “Model 123” forthe attribute type “Product” can determine the remaining attributes,e.g., “copier technology, “Electrical Division”, and “ABC Corp.”According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, anintellectual property document may be assigned to one or more sets ofattributes. For example, the just-mentioned user interface patent mayoptionally be assigned an additional attribute “Model 456” whichinherits the attributes “telephone technology”, “CommunicationsDivision” and “ABC Corp.” for the respective attribute types of“Technology type,” “Division,” and “Company.” A list of intellectualproperty corresponding to one or more specified attributes may begenerated.

Claim charts can be generated that can be linked to other information invarious ways.

According to one or more aspects of the present invention, tools can beused to automate, at least partially, the generation of claim charts.Once the charts are generated, they can be organized, sorted, and orused in connection with reports. Moreover, a library of claim charts canthemselves be analyzed. Optional tools can be provided to query, search,sort, and issue reports based on multiple claim charts. Furthermore, theclaim charts can themselves be tagged as previously described, so thatthe analysis can accommodate user specifications.

One or more aspects of the present invention provide for analysis incomparison to an intellectual property, e.g., a claim chart ofinfringement analysis in relation to a patent, trademark or copyright.The types of charts provided are appropriate to the underlyingintellectual property. For example, claim charts are provided forpatents, likelihood of confusion factors are provided for trademarks,and constituent original elements are provided for copyrights.

Within each category of intellectual property, various types of analysesmay be provided. For example, where the intellectual property is apatent, types of analysis include, e.g., non-infringement chart,invalidity claim chart, freedom to operate, product coverage claimchart, and general claim construction. Where the intellectual propertyis a trademark, types of analyses might include, e.g., likelihood ofconfusion, and confusing similarity. Where the intellectual property isa copyright, types of analyses might include, e.g., infringement, andderivative work analysis. Other types of intellectual property analysesmay be used, or may be referred to by other names. Generally, theanalysis compares a selected intellectual property (e.g., a patent orpatent claims, trademark, or copyrighted work) to a target, e.g., otherdocuments and/or products, typically to determine validity, scope,and/or coverage by the specified intellectual property, optionallyvis-à-vis the product(s).

Analyses can be displayed, printed, or otherwise presented to the userin one or more representations. According to one or more embodiments ofthe present invention, a representation of an analysis as a chart isstatic. Alternatively, a representation of an analysis as a chart isdynamic, where one or more rows, columns, or cells in the chart areselectable to open an additional window or screen with informationrelated to the selected cell. Optionally, the representation includesvarious items embedded therein. The embedded items optionally mayinclude, e.g., thumbnails, hyper links, a reference to a URL, areference to an other file, user-provided text, etc. Selecting theembedded item optionally results in opening or linking to the item. Thesystem optionally determines the type of the item and begins executionof the related application, e.g., the system opens a Powerpoint® item inthe Powerpoint® application.

Optionally, the present invention provides for automatic and/orsemi-automatic evaluation of the intellectual property in question.Consider, for example, that a user selects a trademark infringementanalysis, together with the trademark (the intellectual propertydocument) in comparison to an alleged infringing trademark. Thetrademark infringement analysis may be provided as a chart with, forexample, an enumeration of the likelihood of confusion factors,pre-populated where possible with information from the intellectualproperty document and information gathered regarding the allegedinfringing trademark. The user can then be prompted for remaininginformation and any decisions to be made, e.g., degree of similarity ofthe trademarks.

Or, consider, for example, that a user selects a patent invalidityanalysis. The user is prompted for the patent to be analyzed, and isprompted where necessary to populate the chart with anelement-by-element claim language and/or relevant prior art analyses.Where appropriate, the user is prompted for a response, e.g., “yes,”“no,” or “possible” for a claim element comparison. The user optionallymay interact with the system to insert other information, text, files,etc., into the analysis.

One or more embodiments of the present invention provides for anautomatic or semi-automatic overall analysis encompassing the element orfactor analysis. For example, where a patent claim element-by-elementinfringement analysis indicates that each element is covered (e.g., a“yes”), then the system determines that the patent being analyzed isinfringed by the product under consideration. As other examples, thesystem can provide an overall analysis by claim and/or by intellectualproperty, e.g., that the patent being analyzed covers the product, thatthe patent being analyzed is invalid, that the trademark being analyzedis infringed (or not infringed) by the trademark under consideration, orthat the copyright being considered is not infringed by a work underconsideration. Aspects of the present invention take into considerationelements in a base claim, when performing an overall analysis.

Optionally, claim language is automatically populated in a chart forpatent analysis. The patent claims are evaluated to determine claimelements, which are then populated throughout the chart. Optionally, theuser can refine the previously determined claim elements, e.g., bycollapsing multiple elements and/or by expanding an element intomultiple elements.

One or more optional embodiments of the present invention accommodatecomponents of claims that are not in standard format. Some patent claimsinclude, e.g., chemical equations, formulas, mathematical equations orother information that is not in the same format as the remainder of theclaim and/or can require a different application program to display.Optionally, the present invention provides a concise representation ofthe different format information, e.g., a thumbnail, a link, etc.Optionally, the present invention determines the proper program forhandling the different format of the embedded information and displaysthe information together with the remainder of the claim.

One or more embodiments of the present invention support queries thatusers may want to pose regarding the charts, including for example:

-   -   How many patents (trademarks and/or copyrights) owned by our        company are infringed by our competitor ABC Corp.?    -   Which of our patents have claims covering a specific product of        our company?    -   Which of our patents have claims covering specific products of        our competitors?    -   Which of our patents do not have claims covering any current        product?    -   Who is potentially infringing our patents/trademarks/copyrights?        In which technologies or services? Covering which        products/services/models, and/or components?    -   How many of our products/services at the        concept/design/manufacturing/sales stage are covered and        protected by our patents/trademarks/copyrights/trade secrets?    -   Do the claims of our patent application(s) prepared and filed at        the conception of our invention(s) cover and protect the        products/services developed and marketed under those inventions?        If not, how can we change the scope of our claims to better        support the product/service?    -   How many of our products/services at the        concept/design/manufacturing/sales stage are cleared of known        third party intellectual property rights?    -   How many of our current products/services on the market face        potential infringement claims from third party intellectual        property owners?    -   How did we design around a particular patent or set of patents        for our products/services? (e.g., based on answers to “do our        competitor's patents cover his products”?)    -   How many patents/trademarks/copyrights/trade secrets do we have        in a particular technology?    -   How many patents/trademarks/copyrights/trade secrets do our        competitors have in a particular technology?    -   How many patents/copyrights/trademarks do we have that are not        currently being used?    -   Who do we license intellectual property from? Which intellectual        property? Under what types of terms and conditions? Are we in        compliance with the terms and conditions of the license        agreements?    -   Who licenses our intellectual property? Under what types of        terms and conditions?    -   Which intellectual properties are licensed? Are the terms and        conditions of the license agreement satisfied by the licensees?        How much license royalty revenue is being generated by our        intellectual property?    -   From whom do our competitors license their        patents/trademarks/copyrights/trade secrets?    -   How many of our patents have been annotated or claim charted?    -   How many prior art references did our invalidity claim charts        cite?    -   How many of our patents are invalid?    -   How many of our competitors' patents in a particular product        area are invalid?    -   Which of our patents are invalid?    -   How many patents have more than one invalidity claim chart?

As described previously, one or more aspects of the present inventionoptionally provide for grouping intellectual property documents within ahierarchy. The hierarchy can be presented as, e.g., one or moreenterprise level trees. An appropriate hierarchy of patents or otherintellectual property reflects corporate divisions, technologies,products and/or services within the company (or its competitors).However, optionally, a hierarchy can be customized by a user, such as toreflect other logical divisions.

The intellectual property documents that have been assigned a positionwithin the hierarchy inherit the context of their place within thehierarchy. Because a particular intellectual property document may beincluded in more than one place in the hierarchy, it is useful to trackthe contexts of documents logically (or physically) separate from theintellectual property document. Hence, each intellectual propertydocument may have its usual content, and tags that reflect hierarchycontext.

An intellectual property analysis, or a detail within the analysis, mayreference one or more documents or files external to the system. Forexample, an analysis may reference a white paper published on theInternet. According to one or more embodiments of the present invention,the system stores a copy of the external reference. In this manner, acurrent snapshot is created of a transient file. The stored copy of theexternal reference may be referenced by more than one analysis. Hence,the stored external reference may have tags that reflect context.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, contextis provided by tagging associated with the document. Context can beinherited from an intellectual property document, reflectingcharacteristics of placement within the hierarchy, e.g., an enterpriselevel tree. Context can also be created by relating one or moreintellectual property documents and/or one or more external referenceswithin an analysis; this context reflects the analysis.

Context can be stored, e.g., by tags such as in metadata, and/or byother searchable/queryable indices. If the context is stored, thecontext itself is searchable. Optionally, the context, e.g., a tag, isassociated with a pointer or other reference to the relevant annotationwithin the analysis, the intellectual property document, and/or thestored external reference.

Because the tags storing the context are searchable, the available typesof searches are readily defined by the tags. Hence, the analysis contextas well as the hierarchical context is searchable. For example, the usercan format a query reflecting one or more hierarchy context (e.g.,particular division within the company) and analysis context (e.g.,target of analysis, invalid patents).

Optionally, the tags are stored with versions, to enable a user to tracea history.

In accordance with one or more aspects of the present invention, ananalysis related to one or more particular intellectual propertydocuments can be initiated by, e.g., selecting the intellectual propertydocuments. According to one or more embodiments of the presentinvention, the user interacts with the system to indicate that ananalysis based on the type of intellectual property document (e.g., aclaim chart for a patent) is to be created, and to determine the type ofchart (e.g., an infringement analysis claim chart).

The analysis, such as a claim chart, may be represented in any ofseveral convenient displays. According to one or more embodiments, theanalysis is represented as a chart comprising several windows within aframe, or several selectable items within a frame.

Analysis context is initially determined responsive to a user assigningvalues and relations to a particular unit of an analysis. For example, arepresentation of a claim chart would present several cells to beassigned values and/or to be related to intellectual property documentsand/or other documents. One or more cells within the analysisrepresentation correspond to a unit of analysis. The cell comprisesinformation identifying the particular analysis, information on the typeof analysis (e.g., patent infringement), information appropriate to theanalysis and the particular cell (e.g., conformance), the relevantintellectual property document and (optionally) portion of theintellectual property document, what it is compared to, together withthe contextual information inherited from the intellectual propertydocument.

The representation of an analysis, such as a claim chart, can bedetermined from the tags that relate to the particular analysis.According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, storageof representation itself, such as in a Word® document, is optional.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, for aclaim chart, the context associated with an intellectual property unitof analysis for a claim chart of infringement analysis include:hierarchical context (e.g., patent number, company, division); andanalysis context: for example, type of analysis, patent, patent claim,element of patent claim, reference, annotation, and conformance.

Reference is now made to FIG. 24 is an example representation of ananalysis, in a static style. This particular example is appropriate forpatent claims analysis. It includes a column for patent claims 24023, acolumn for elements of the claim language 24017, a column forannotations (e.g., comments relevant to the analysis) 24015, columnsreflecting the conformance of the product under consideration to theclaim element 24019, and an optional miscellaneous column 24051. Incorrespondence to the usual element-by-element analysis, the patentclaims are divided into elements, e.g., preamble (24025, 24033, 24041,24045), and subsequent elements (24027, 24029, 24031, 24035, 24037,24041, 24043, 24047, 24049). The annotations column 24015 optionallyincludes, e.g., text, hyperlinks, thumbnails, image, playable audio,and/or playable video. The conformance column 24019 includesindications, in the present example, of “yes” 2409, “no” 24011, and “?”(unknown or possible) 24013. The optional miscellaneous column 24051contains attachments and references, e.g., hyperlinks, URLs, paths,etc., locally or networked, to any kind of digital media.

According to one example embodiment of the present invention, thisanalysis chart is generated by selecting the patent and indicating that,e.g., an invalidity analysis is desired. A unique analysis identifiermay be assigned to the particular analysis. Typically, the patent isselected from a hierarchy such as an enterprise tree. Optionally, thecontext includes the intellectual property identifier (e.g., patentnumber). The hierarchy context is inherited by the analysis elements.The analysis context of each unit of analysis may be assigned throughinteraction with the user: for example, type of analysis, patent, patentclaim, patent claim element, annotation (if applicable), conformance (ifapplicable), and miscellaneous information (if applicable). The claimnumber, claim language and claim elements optionally initially default,e.g., to an automatic insertion by the system of the content of theclaims of the selected patent.

FIG. 25 is an example of a claim chart corresponding to FIG. 24, in adynamic style, where the cells of the chart open windows or screens. Theanalysis includes a column for patent claims 25023, a column forelements of the claim language 25017, a column for the comparison object(information representing product, claims, etc.) to which theintellectual property is being compared 25021, a column for annotations(e.g., comments relevant to the analysis) 25015, columns reflecting theconformance of the product under consideration to the claim element25019, and an optional attachment/reference column 25053. Incorrespondence to the usual element-by-element analysis, the patentclaims are divided into, e.g., preamble (25025, 25033, 25041, 25045),and elements (25027, 25029, 25031, 25035, 25037, 25041, 25043, 25047,25049). The annotations column 25015 includes, e.g., text, hyperlinks,thumbnails, image, playable audio, and/or playable video. Theconformance column 25019 includes indications, in the present example,for “yes” 2509, “no” 25011, and “?” (unknown or possible) 25013. Theoptional attachment/reference column 25053 contains attachments andreferences, e.g., hyperlinks, URLs, paths, etc., locally or networked,to any kind of digital media. Hierarchy context and analysis context isassigned is described further. A tag representing the comparison objectis included as the analysis context. Selection of a particular row,column, or cell optionally opens a new window or screen for the selectedrow, column or cell.

According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, one ormore features may determine additional information and add it to thechart. Additional information may be determined automatically, or withmanual intervention. For example, claim dependencies may be determinedand added to a patent claim chart. FIG. 26 is an example of a claimchart corresponding to FIG. 24, including an example of a dependenciesfeature. Here, the dependencies feature provides an indication ofwhether the claim is independent, dependent, and/or multiply dependent,as well as the claim it depends from. It includes a column for patentclaims 26023, a column for elements of the claim language 26017, acolumn for annotations (e.g., comments relevant to the analysis) 26015,columns reflecting the conformance of the product under consideration tothe claim element 26019, and a column for information representative ofthe object being compared to the intellectual property 26021. The patentclaims are divided into, e.g., preamble (26025, 26033, 26041, 26045),and elements (26027, 26029, 26031, 26035, 26037, 26041, 26043, 26047,26049). The annotations column 26015 includes, e.g., text, hyperlinks,thumbnails, image, playable audio, and/or playable video. Theconformance column 26019 includes indications, in the present example,for “yes” 2609, “no” 26011, and “?” (unknown or possible) 26013. Anoptional miscellaneous column 26051 contains attachments and references,e.g., hyperlinks, URLs, paths, etc., locally or networked, to any kindof digital media.

In the above examples, charts have been presented in tabular format.Nevertheless, because the units of analysis are constructed from storedcontext, the format of the analysis does not necessarily need to be atabular chart. According to one or more aspects of the presentinvention, an analysis may be presented in a non-tabular format. Forexample, FIG. 27 illustrates an alternative, multiple-window view orscreen corresponding to a chart. A first analyzed element, e.g., theclaim(s) of a patent, a trademark, or a copyright constituent element,is displayed in a first window 2701. A second window 2705 provides adisplay of the object of the analysis, e.g., a product being analyzedfor patent coverage, a trademark being analyzed for confusingsimilarity, or a potentially infringing work. A third window 2703provides a display of, e.g., an annotation to be entered relating to theanalyzed element and/or the analyzed object. In the present example, afourth window 2707 provides an optional display of the chart or otheropen document, optionally with tag represented in this example asselectable tabs 2709, 2711, 2713, 2715, commands and/or links to furtherinformation. Tabs, commands and/or links may include informationassociated with the chart or other open document regarding, e.g.,attributes, conformance, etc.

According to one or more aspects of the present invention, a chartincludes one or more tags of information, optionally specific to one ormore types of charts. According to one or more aspects of the presentinvention, tags associated with the chart further may be associated withan intellectual property document in combination with one or more othertags. For example, a patent chart may be associated with an infringementanalysis that is tagged to a hierarchy context, e.g., a particulardivision of a company, to a competitor company, and/or to a competitor'sproduct, etc. Optionally, the tags associated with a chart may bepopulated by being assigned to an enterprise tree structure andinheriting the values of the tree structure. Optionally, tags arespecific to a type of chart, that is, an analysis context, e.g.,indication of patent number, indication of type of chart, indication ofproduct. According to at least one aspect of the present invention, oneor more tags are searchable, and/or may be used for sorting charts,organizing charts, reporting charts, and querying charges. Optionally,various search and/or report commands are provided to navigate chartsand provide reports. The tags for the chart may be presented in anyconvenient format, for example as illustrated in FIG. 27.

Reference is now made to FIG. 28, providing an example of a userinterface 2800 including an intellectual property document tree 2807 andan intellectual property analysis application 2805, according to one ormore embodiments of the present invention. According to one or moreaspects of the present invention, the patent or other intellectualproperty to be analyzed is located, for example prior to performing theanalysis. In the present example, patents relevant to a particularcorporation have been stored in a document tree 2803. Sub-trees 2801optionally are included. The document tree reflects an enterprisehierarchy, in this example, General Electric, and divisions thereof. Aportion of the document tree can be expanded to reveal furthersubdivisions, or finally, a particular intellectual property document.In the present example, once the intellectual property document isselected, the system interacts with the user to determine whether thedocument should be analyzed 2813.

Reference is now made to FIG. 29, providing an example of a userinterface 2900 including an intellectual property document tree 2907 andan intellectual property analysis application 2905, according to one ormore embodiments of the present invention. According to one or moreaspects of the present invention, the patent or other intellectualproperty to be analyzed is located, for example prior to performing theanalysis. In the present example, patents relevant to a particularcorporation have been stored in a document tree 2903. Sub-trees 2901optionally are included. The user in this case has drilled down to aparticular intellectual property document 2913. The selected documentincludes the context determined by its position in the hierarchy. Thisexample user interface also includes an intellectual property organizertree 2909, providing a file structure 2916 for temporary storage ofpointers to patents. This is useful, for example, to structure projectscomprising patents intended for intake into the hierarchy structure;when the patents or other intellectual property documents are positionedin one or more places of the hierarchy, they are assigned the context ofthe position(s). Also provided in this example user interface is anexplorer 2911 for storing user folders, files, etc.

Reference is now made to FIG. 30, providing an example of a userinterface 3000 including an intellectual property analysis application3005, according to one or more embodiments of the present invention.Here, the user has located a particular patent 3009 within a subdivision3001 of the document tree 3003. This particular instance of theintellectual property document has a hierarchical context since it iswithin the hierarchy. The system interacts with the user to determinewhat actions to perform on the selected document, e.g., “analyze”.Together with the analysis, the system will assign analysis context tothe particular instance of the intellectual property document. Accordingto one or more aspects of the present invention, a synopsis of theselected document is displayed in the synopsis window 3007. In thepresent example, the display includes the abstract of the patent 3011;and links to fields within the patent 3013 within the patent itself,such as inventor, assignee, classification, background/brief summary,description of invention, claims, description of drawings, anddrawings/images/figures. Optionally, the synopsis includes informationobtained from other sources, e.g., forward references, and assignmentdetail information.

Reference is now made to FIG. 31, providing an example of a userinterface 3101 including an intellectual property document tree 3112 andan intellectual property analysis application 3115, according to one ormore embodiments of the present invention. The user interface displaysthe intellectual property analysis 3133. In the present example, theanalysis provides a claim analysis chart. The analysis 3133 includescolumns for claim number 3127, claim language 3129, reference 3131(e.g., what the intellectual property is being compared to), anindication of infringement 3135 (or indication of other conformance),and optional annotations 3137. The user interface includes references toalternative intellectual property applications, for example, anintellectual property organizer 3113, an intellectual property licensingapplication 3117, a docketing application 3119, an automated prosecutionapplication 3121, an automated filing application 3123, and an automatedannuity application 3127.

According to one or more aspects of the present invention, the patent orother intellectual property to be analyzed is located, for example priorto performing the analysis. In the present example, patents relevant toa particular corporation have been stored in a document tree 3111.Sub-trees 3109 optionally are included. A user may drill down throughthe document tree to a particular intellectual property document 3107,for example a patent. The user may select a standard or customizedapplication 3105 to perform on the document, for example, analyze. Inthe present example, the user selects to analyze, and the systeminteracts with the user to determine the type of analysis 3103 based onthe type of document, e.g., patent infringement or conformance analysis.Further, the system interacts with the user to determine the analysis.The analysis context and hierarchy context are assigned to the units ofthe analysis.

FIG. 32 illustrates an example block diagram of one or more embodimentsof the system according to FIG. 1. Some elements have been omitted forbrevity, although they may be included in one or more embodiments of thepresent invention. In this example, the system 111 includes an analysisapplication 3201. The analyses are stored, according to one or moreembodiments of the present invention, in one or more opinions databases123. The patents database 131, trademarks data base 125, and/orcopyrights database 127 were previously described. According to one ormore embodiments of the present invention, a reference between ananalysis reference and one or more patents, trademarks, or copyrights inthe databases 131, 125, 127 may be stored in an analysis references database 3203. The analysis references may include details including, e.g.,the particular analysis (e.g., claim chart) and/or elements in theanalysis; the intellectual property forming the basis of the analysis(e.g., patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, etc.); intellectualproperty or other documents (e.g., representations of products) which isthe target of the analysis; and other documents, files, intellectualproperty, etc. referred to in the analysis. The format of the analysisreference may depend on the type of analysis.

For example, according to one or more embodiments of the presentinvention, an invalidity analysis reference may include an indication ofanalysis type (invalidity), claim chart, patent analyzed for invalidity,elements in the claim chart; and for each element, a target document(e.g., another patent) and location of interest in the target document,an indication of whether the claim language is met, and one or more userannotations (e.g. text, hyper links, pointers to other files). Asanother example, according to one or more embodiments of the presentinvention, a patent infringement analysis reference may include anindication of the analysis type (infringement), a particular claimchart, a patent analyzed for infringement, elements in the claim chart,and the target product analyzed for infringement; and for each element,an indication of the portion of the target, and any annotations.According to one or more embodiments of the present invention, thereferences may be utilized in connection, for example, with searching,sorting, reporting, analyzing over groups of analyses.

Reference is now made to FIGS. 36 and 37, illustrating an example userinterface for creation or access of an intellectual property analysis3603. FIG. 36 provides an alternative example of a user interface 3601.Here, the user 3605 is presented with a hierarchy 3615 within whichintellectual property documents are assigned. A particular intellectualproperty document 3607 has been selected from the hierarchy 3615. Thesystem interacts with the user to determine that the user wishes toanalyze 3609 the selected document. The system further interacts withthe user to determine the type of analysis 3611, and whether the userwishes to create a new analysis or to select an existing analysis 3613.Processing of the analysis continues as described, for example, above.

FIG. 37 provides an alternative example of a user interface 3701illustrating an intellectual property analysis corresponding to FIG. 36.In this example, the analysis provides a representation of a validityclaim chart for the selected document. Parts of the analysis that aredisplayed include, e.g., the claim number 3703, the claim language ofthe element 3705, the references 3707 (e.g., to an other document), thevalidity analysis 3709 for the element, and annotations for the element3711.

The system may prompt the user for further details with regard to theelement-by-element analysis. For example, if the type of analysis beingperformed is an infringement chart, there is an issue of whether thereis infringement literally and/or under Doctrine of Equivalents.Accordingly, the system may prompt the user to indicate whether therewould be infringement/coverage literally, and if not, by applyingDoctrine of Equivalents. This may be implemented, for example, byproviding another pop-up box that queries the user as to infringement byapplication of the Doctrine of Equivalents.

Optionally, if appropriate, the system may pre-determine portions of theanalysis based on the analysis up to the point. For example, in aninfringement analysis, it is known that a dependent claim isnon-infringing if it depends from a claim (dependent or independent)which is itself non-infringing. No further analysis is necessary. One ormore embodiments of the present system, performing an infringementanalysis, determine the claims from which a dependent claim depends, andwhether those claims are non-infringing, based on a summary of theelement-by-element analysis. If a dependent claim is non-infringing dueto its dependency, the system indicates that the entire dependent claimis non-infringing and indicates the basis for the determination. Thisindication can be displayed in any appropriate manner, e.g., anadditional column or a pop-up box. The user optionally may analyzeelements of the non-infringing dependent claim.

Reference is now made to FIG. 38, illustrating a user interface 3801with an example summary report 3803 of intellectual property analyses.Here, the user has searched the system to determine the intellectualproperty analyses involving the particular patent. The system lists,optionally by type of analysis, each analysis 3805, the target of theanalysis 3807, and the bottom-line analysis 3817. For an infringementchart 3819, the bottom-line analysis is whether or not the target of theanalysis 3807 infringes; whereas for a validity claim chart 3821, thebottom-line analysis is whether or not the document forming the basis ofthe analysis is valid. The system can determine the bottom-line analysis3817 from the per-element validity analysis (e.g., 3709) or infringementanalysis in a particular analysis associated with the document formingthe basis of the analysis. Where the particular analysis includesdetails such as infringement/coverage by Doctrine of Equivalents, thereport optionally includes an indication of which patents are infringedby applying the Doctrine of Equivalents. Other identifying informationcan be included, e.g., creation date 3809, author 3811, update date3813, and update author 3815. It is not necessary to access the documentitself in order to determine the various analyses surrounding thedocument, and hence the relative strength of the document.

FIG. 21 is an illustration of a computer 58 used for implementing thecomputer processing in accordance with a computer-implemented embodimentof the present invention. The procedures described above may bepresented in terms of program procedures executed on, for example, acomputer or network of computers.

Viewed externally in FIG. 21, computer 48 has a central processing unit(CPU) 68 having disk drives 69, 70. Disk drives 69, 70 are merelysymbolic of a number of disk drives that might be accommodated bycomputer 58. Typically, these might be one or more of the following: afloppy disk drive 69, a hard disk drive (not shown), and a CD ROM ordigital video disk, as indicated by the slot at 70. The number and typeof drives varies, typically with different computer configurations. Diskdrives 69, 70 are, in fact, options, and for space considerations, maybe omitted from the computer system used in conjunction with theprocesses described herein.

Computer 58 also has a display 71 upon which information may bedisplayed. The display is optional for the computer used in conjunctionwith the system described herein. A keyboard 72 and/or a pointing device73, such as a mouse 73, may be provided as input devices to interfacewith central processing unit 68. To increase input efficiency, keyboard72 may be supplemented or replaced with a scanner, card reader, or otherdata input device. The pointing device 73 may be a mouse, touch padcontrol device, track ball device, or any other type of pointing device.

Alternatively, referring to FIG. 23, computer 58 may also include a CDROM reader 95 and CD recorder 96, which are interconnected by a bus 97along with other peripheral devices 98 supported by the bus structureand protocol. Bus 97 serves as the main information highwayinterconnecting other components of the computer. It is connected via aninterface 99 to the computer 58.

FIG. 22 illustrates a block diagram of the internal hardware of thecomputer of FIG. 21. CPU 75 is the central processing unit of thesystem, performing calculations and logic operations required to executea program. Read only memory (ROM) 76 and random access memory (RAM) 77constitute the main memory of the computer.

Disk controller 78 interfaces one or more disk drives to the system bus74. These disk drives may be floppy disk drives such as 79, or CD ROM orDVD (digital video/versatile disk) drives, as at 80, or internal orexternal hard drives 81. As previously indicated these various diskdrives and disk controllers are optional devices.

A display interface 82 permits information from bus 74 to be displayedon the display 83. Again, as indicated, the display 83 is an optionalaccessory for a central or remote computer in the communication network,as are infrared receiver 88 and transmitter 89. Communication withexternal devices occurs using communications port 84.

In addition to the standard components of the computer, the computer mayalso include an interface 85, which allows for data input through thekeyboard 86 or pointing device, such as a mouse 87.

The foregoing detailed description includes many specific details. Theinclusion of such detail is for the purpose of illustration only andshould not be understood to limit the invention. In addition, featuresin one embodiment may be combined with features in other embodiments ofthe invention. Various changes may be made without departing from thescope of the invention as defined in the following claims.

As one example, the information system may include a general purposecomputer, or a specially programmed special purpose computer. It may beimplemented as a distributed computer system rather than a singlecomputer. Similarly, a communications link may be World Wide Web, amodem over a POTS line, and/or any other method of communicating betweencomputers and/or users. Moreover, the processing could be controlled bya software program on one or more computer system or processors, orcould even be partially or wholly implemented in hardware.

This invention is not limited to particular types of intellectualproperty. It is intended for use with any type of intellectual property,e.g., patents, trademarks, trade secrets, designs, sui generisprotection, copyrights, licenses, litigations, and/or other rights.Further, various aspects of one or more embodiments of the presentinvention are useful with documents including those not related tointellectual property.

Further, the invention is not limited to particular protocols forcommunication. Any appropriate communication protocol may be used.

The report may be developed in connection with HTML display format.Although HTML is the preferred display format, it is possible to utilizealternative display formats for displaying a report and obtaining userinstructions. The invention has been discussed in connection withparticular examples. However, the principles apply equally to otherexamples and/or realizations. Naturally, the relevant data may differ,as appropriate.

Further, this invention has been discussed in certain examples as if itis made available by a provider to a single customer with a single site.The invention may be used by numerous customers, if preferred. Also, theinvention may be utilized by customers with multiple sites and/or agentsand/or licensee-type arrangements.

This invention has been described in connection with example dataformats, for example XML and USPTO defined XML. However, the inventionmay be used in connection with other data formats, structured and/orunstructured, unitary and/or distributed.

The system used in connection with the invention may rely on theintegration of various components including, as appropriate and/or ifdesired, hardware and software servers, applications software, databaseengines, server area networks, firewall and SSL security, productionback-up systems, and/or applications interface software. Theconfiguration may be, preferably, network-based and optionally utilizesthe Internet as an exemplary primary interface with the customer forinformation delivery.

The system may store collected information in a database. An appropriatedatabase may be on a standard server, for example, a small Sun Sparc orother remote location. The database is optionally an MSQL, MYSQL, minisequel server MiniSQL, or Oracle. Information is stored in the database,and optionally stored and backed up by a back-up server, periodically ora-periodically, for example, every night along with all other data inthe servers that are behind the corporate firewall into a back-upstorage facility. Back-up storage facility comprises, for example, oneor more tape silos that are also used to back up the entire networkevery night. Data security and segregation of the various customers'data is advantageously maintained. The information, for example, willeventually get stored, for example, on a platform that may, for examplebe UNIX-based.

The various databases may be in, for example, a UNIX format, but otherstandard data formats may also be used. Windows NT, for example, isused, but other standard operating systems may also be used. Optionally,the various databases include a conversion system capable of receivingdata in various standard formats.

From the user's perspective, according to some embodiments the user mayaccess the public Internet or other suitable network and look at itsspecific information at any time from any location as long as it hasInternet or other suitable access. For example, the user opens itsstandard web browser, goes to the address that is specified for its loaddata, and optionally fills out a user ID to log on, and a password toidentify it as the specific user or the specific customer of thatparticular information.

Optionally, security of the networks is as tight as possible such thatthe data, not only customer data, but any information that is beyond thefirewall is always protected against any kind of potential intrusion.The user, and, indeed, multiple users concurrently can look at the sameinformation. Advantageously, having this system on the Internet enablesusers at various locations throughout the country or the world, to visitthe same site at the same time and enter into a discussion or talk groupas to what they are seeing, what it means, and maybe what they can dowith that information.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method for automatically generating a patentanalysis claim chart, comprising: providing, in the computer, a claimchart for an independent claim in a patent, the text of the independentclaim being subdivided into plural separate claim elements;automatically generating, in the computer, a visual representation ofthe claim chart, wherein the visual representation further includes anindication per separate claim element whether or not there isconformance of the separate claim element to a target of a patentnon-infringement analysis, a patent invalidity analysis, a patentfreedom to operate analysis, a patent product coverage analysis, or apatent infringement analysis, the target being an otherproduct-or-document to which the patent is compared; and automaticallydetermining, in the computer: that the independent claim is notconforming when one of the separate claim elements in the independentclaim is indicated as not conforming and another one of the separateclaim elements in the independent claim is indicated as conforming, thatthe independent claim is not conforming when all of the separate claimelements in the independent claim is indicated as not conforming, andthat the independent claim is conforming when all of the separate claimelements in the claim are indicated as conforming.
 2. The method ofclaim 1, wherein the visual representation is dynamically responsive toa user, wherein selection of a row, column, or a cell of the visualrepresentation of the separate claim element launches the row, column orcell into a separate window.
 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the claimchart is one of a patent non-infringement analysis, a patent invalidityanalysis, a patent freedom to operate analysis, a patent productcoverage analysis, a patent claim construction analysis, and a patentinfringement analysis.
 4. The method of claim 1, wherein respectiveportions of the target to which the separate claim element is comparedare visually displayed by running a program to display the native formatof the respective portions.
 5. The method of claim 1, furthercomprising, responsive to user input, at least one of collapsing andexpanding at least one row or column of the visual representation of theclaim chart with respect to an adjacent element.
 6. The method of claim1, further comprising, for the separate claim elements, prompting theuser to indicate whether or not the separate claim element conforms to aportion of the target.
 7. The method of claim 1, the conformance beingindicated as literal infringement, no literal infringement, anddoctrine-of-equivalents infringement, wherein only when the conformanceindicates no literal infringement, prompting the user to input adoctrine-of-equivalents infringement indication which is used as theconformance in the determining instead of the conformance indicating noliteral infringement.
 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the claim chartincludes a dependent claim which depends from the independent claim,further comprising: automatically without user intervention determiningthat the dependent claim that otherwise conforms is not conforming whenthe independent claim indicates not conforming but determining theconformance of the dependent claim separate from the independent claimwhen the independent claim indicates conforming.
 9. A computer-readablestorage medium comprising instructions for execution by at least onecomputer, the instructions including a method for automaticallygenerating a patent analysis claim chart, the instructions forimplementing the steps of: providing, in the computer, a claim chart foran independent claim in a patent, the text of the independent claimbeing subdivided into plural separate claim elements; automaticallygenerating, in the computer, a visual representation of the claim chart,wherein the visual representation further includes an indication perseparate claim element whether or not there is conformance of theseparate claim element to a target of a patent non-infringementanalysis, a patent invalidity analysis, a patent freedom to operateanalysis, a patent product coverage analysis, or a patent infringementanalysis, the target being an other product-or-document to which thepatent is compared; and automatically determining, in the computer: thatthe independent claim is not conforming when one of the separate claimelements in the independent claim is indicated as not conforming andanother one of the separate claim elements in the independent claim isindicated as conforming, that the independent claim is not conformingwhen all of the separate claim elements in the independent claim isindicated as not conforming, and that the independent claim isconforming when all of the separate claim elements in the claim areindicated as conforming.
 10. The computer readable storage medium ofclaim 9, the conformance being indicated as literal infringement, noliteral infringement, and doctrine-of-equivalents infringement, whereinonly when the conformance indicates no literal infringement, promptingthe user to input a doctrine-of-equivalents infringement indicationwhich is used as the conformance in the determining instead of theconformance indicating no literal infringement.
 11. The computerreadable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the visual representation isdynamically responsive to a user, wherein selection of a row, column, ora cell of the visual representation of the separate claim elementlaunches the row, column or cell into a separate window.
 12. Thecomputer readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the claim chart isone of a patent non-infringement analysis, a patent invalidity analysis,a patent freedom to operate analysis, a patent product coverageanalysis, a patent claim construction analysis, and a patentinfringement analysis.
 13. The computer readable storage medium of claim9, wherein respective portions of the target to which the separate claimelement is compared are visually displayed by running a program todisplay the native format of the respective portions.
 14. The computerreadable storage medium of claim 9, further comprising, responsive touser input, at least one of collapsing and expanding at least one row orcolumn of the visual representation of the claim chart with respect toan adjacent element.
 15. The computer readable storage medium of claim9, further comprising, for the separate claim elements, prompting theuser to indicate whether or not the separate claim element conforms to aportion of the target.
 16. The computer readable storage medium of claim9, wherein the claim chart includes a dependent claim which depends fromthe independent claim, further comprising instructions for:automatically without user intervention determining that the dependentclaim that otherwise conforms is not conforming when the independentclaim indicates not conforming but determining the conformance of thedependent claim separate from the independent claim when the independentclaim indicates conforming.
 17. A computer-implemented system forautomatically generating a patent analysis claim chart, comprising: adisplay; a processor, the processor being configured to provide a claimchart for an independent claim in a patent, the text of the oneindependent claim being subdivided into plural separate claim elements;automatically generate, on the display, a visual representation of theclaim chart, wherein the visual representation further includes anindication per separate claim element whether or not there isconformance of the separate claim element to a target of a patentnon-infringement analysis, a patent invalidity analysis, a patentfreedom to operate analysis, a patent product coverage analysis, or apatent infringement analysis, the target being an otherproduct-or-document to which the patent is compared; and automaticallydetermine: that the independent claim is not conforming when one of theseparate claim elements in the independent claim is indicated as notconforming and another one of the separate claim elements in theindependent claim is indicated as conforming, that the independent claimis not conforming when all of the separate claim elements in theindependent claim is indicated as not conforming, and that theindependent claim is conforming when all of the separate claim elementsin the claim are indicated as conforming.
 18. The system of claim 17,the conformance being indicated as literal infringement, no literalinfringement, and doctrine-of-equivalents infringement, wherein onlywhen the conformance indicates no literal infringement, prompting theuser to input a doctrine-of-equivalents infringement indication which isused as the conformance in the determining instead of the conformanceindicating no literal infringement.
 19. The system of claim 17, whereinthe claim chart is one of a patent non-infringement analysis, a patentinvalidity analysis, a patent freedom to operate analysis, a patentproduct coverage analysis, a patent claim construction analysis, and apatent infringement analysis.
 20. The system of claim 17, whereinrespective portions of the target to which the separate claim element iscompared are visually displayed by running a program to display thenative format of the respective portions.
 21. The system of claim 17,further comprising, responsive to user input, at least one of collapsingand expanding at least one row or column of the visual representation ofthe claim chart with respect to an adjacent element.
 22. The system ofclaim 17, further comprising, for the separate claim elements, promptingthe user to indicate whether or not the separate claim element conformsto a portion of the target.
 23. The system of claim 17, wherein theclaim chart includes a dependent claim which depends from theindependent claim, the processor being configured to: automaticallywithout user intervention determine that the dependent claim thatotherwise conforms is not conforming when the independent claimindicates not conforming but determine the conformance of the dependentclaim separate from the independent claim when the independent claimindicates conforming.